RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02269
            INDEX CODE: 112.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her deceased husband’s rank be reinstated to Staff Sergeant (SSgt).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While going through her deceased husband’s military  records  she  has
found what she believes to be a terrible error or  injustice  to  him.
He had served as a B24 tail gunner during World  War  II  (WWII)  and,
after 30 missions, had  accumulated  the  Distinguished  Flying  Cross
(DFC), the Air Medal (AM)  with  three  oak  leaf  clusters,  and  the
European-African-Middle Eastern Ribbon.  Upon returning  home  he  had
experienced problems and was treated  by  the  Army  Air  Force  (AAF)
hospital in St Petersburg, Florida.  The highest grade held  was  SSgt
but sometime after returning home  his  grade  was  changed.   He  was
classified a disabled veteran and she feels it wrong that  his  higher
grade was taken from him.  She is trying to clear this for his  family
and she feels he would approve of what she is trying to do.

In support of her  appeal,  the  applicant  has  provided  a  personal
statement, a Certificate of Death from the state of ---, a copy  of  a
court document naming the deceased’s wife as executor of  his  estate,
copies of orders awarding the Air Medal and an oak leaf cluster to the
Air Medal to the deceased member, an obituary, a congressional request
for information from C/M Jo Bonner of Alabama, a copy of the  deceased
members Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, a copy of  his  Army
Qualification record, a copy of an excerpt from a newspaper article, a
hand-written list of the deceased member’s 31  missions  during  WWII,
and a copy of his honorable discharge certificate.

Her appeal, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The deceased member entered active duty on 17  March  1943.   In  June
1945 he appeared before a Board of Officers and  was  recommended  for
discharge for inaptness, lack of adaptability for the military service
and was not recommended for retention.  He served on active duty until
26 June 1945 when he was  discharged  under  the  provisions  of  Army
Regulation (AR) 615-365 (Convenience of the Government  –  Inaptness).
His Enlisted Record and Report of  Separation  indicated  the  highest
grade held as SSgt.  He was serving in the grade  of  private  at  the
time of discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS addressed the discharge and defers to AFPC/DPPPWB  and  the
Board to determine whether or not the applicant’s rank of SSgt  should
be restored.  DPPRS believes, based on the documentation in the  file,
the discharge was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation in effect  at  the  time  and
that  the  discharge  was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge
authority.  They do not object however to granting the relief based on
the former member’s distinguished wartime service and the  absence  of
derogatory documentation in his records.

DPPRS’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial.  They  note  the  untimeliness  of  the
application under the statute of limitations and note the  applicant’s
claim could be dismissed under the equitable doctrine of  laches  that
denies relief to the applicant who has  unreasonably  and  inexcusably
delayed asserting a claim.  DPPPWB recommends the applicant’s  request
be time barred, but should the Board choose to decide  the  case  they
recommend  the  Board  deny  relief  based  on  a  lack  of   official
documentation.

DPPPWB’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant’s spouse gives thanks to those responsible for reviewing her
deceased husband’s record.   She  asks  only  if  the  copies  of  the
documentation she sent do, in some  way,  confirm  that  her  deceased
husband suffered from a nervous breakdown after his combat  experience
overseas.  She has provided attachments that indicate he  was  treated
in an Army Air Forces Convalescent Hospital  in  St.  Petersburg,  FL.
She indicates that her deceased husband lost his rating (rank)  during
that hospital stay.  She attributes her  long  delay  in  filing  this
claim to the fact she did not know of the  demotion  until  after  her
husband died.  She states her deceased husband would never say  or  do
anything against his country as he was proud to  be  an  American  and
considered it an honor to serve in the Air  Force.   In  summary,  her
remarks indicate that her deceased husband recovered somewhat over the
years as he held steady employment and began to attend  reunions  with
his WWII comrades.  She cannot imagine him doing anything  that  would
warrant a demotion.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice.  Based on the  available  records  we
cannot determine whether or not the former service member's  grade  at
the time of his discharge was in error.   However,  we  have  evidence
that the service member served his country with distinction  during  a
period of wartime.  Therefore, in an effort to remove any  possibility
of an  injustice,  we  recommend  the  deceased  member's  records  be
corrected to show that  he  was  discharged  in  the  grade  of  staff
sergeant.

______________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 26  June  1945,  he
was discharged in the grade of Staff Sergeant, rather than Private.

______________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 28 October 2003, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member
      Ms. Leslie E. Abbott, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Jul 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Available Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 Aug 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 26 Aug 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Sep 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 23 Sep 03, w/atchs.




                                   Mr. Richard A. Peterson
                                   Panel Chair



                         DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
                                WASHINGTON DC




[pic]
Office Of The Assistant Secretary





AFBCMR BC-2003-02269




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of  the  Department  of  the  Air
Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to  show  that  on  26  June
1945, he was discharged in the grade of Staff  Sergeant,  rather  than
Private.






     JOE G. LINEBERGER

     Director

     Air Force Review Boards Agency