RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:		DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-02487 INDEX CODE:	131.03
XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:	NONE
HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His record be corrected to show he was promoted to the grade of staff sergeant rather than private first class (PFC); he was assigned to the 36th Division, 143rd Infantry Company; he was injured on 23 January 1944, 19 October 1944, and 24 December 1944 rather than 10 March 1944; and that his height was 5'11 rather than 5'8 at the time of discharge.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
There were several mistakes made on his discharge paperwork. He was encouraged by his grandsons to have his records corrected.

In support of his application, applicant provides a personal statement, a copy of an Honorable Discharge Certificate from the Army, a copy of his WD AGO 53, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation Honorable Discharge, copies of letters from the United States Senate, War Department and a copy of a letter to his parents.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered active military service on 13 May 1943 in the grade of private (PVT). He was honorably discharged in the grade of private first class (PFC) on 8 November 1945. He served
2 years, 6 months and 26 days of total active service.
The applicant’s discharge records, WD AGO Form 53, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation Honorable Discharge and a copy of his honorable discharge certificate from the Army show his grade at discharge as “private first class.”

On 5 September 2008,  AFPC/DPPRSP corrected the applicant's records to reflect that he was assigned to the 36th Division, 143rd Infantry Company; he was injured on 23 January 1944,

24 December 1944 and 19 October 1944; his height was 5"11 and he was awarded the Purple Heart, 2nd Oak Leaf Cluster.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial and states that there were no promotion orders in the applicant's record; however, all documentation refers to the applicant as either a PVT or PFC. Therefore, he would have had to by-pass two ranks (corporal and sergeant) in order to be promoted to the rank of SSgt. DPSOE believes that supervisors and commanding officers at the time were in a better position to evaluate the applicant’s potential and eligibility for promotion. The applicant’s delay of over 62 years has greatly complicated the ability to determine the merits of his case.

AFPC/DPSOE’s complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 26 September 2008 for review and response within 30 days. As of this date, this office has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1.	The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.	The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We note the administrative corrections already made to the applicant’s records. However, after a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the applicant should be promoted to the grade of staff sergeant. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. We have no doubt that the applicant served honorably and his contributions during the war are acknowledged by this Board and appreciated by his country. If he is able to provide official documentation to support his claim of being promoted, we will reconsider his application. In view of the
1.	
above and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2008-02487 in Executive Session on 9 December 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair 
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2008-02487 was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jun 08, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 3 Sep 08.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Sep 08.