RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01683
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His discharge papers reflect the rank of sergeant versus private.
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He would like his grave marker to reflect the rank of sergeant not private.
He earned his rank while serving in combat.
In support of his request, applicant submits a copy of his Enlisted Record
and Report of Separation with his Honorable Discharge certificate and
excerpts from his military record. Applicant’s submission, with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 24 September
1942 and entered active duty on 8 October 1942. He was assigned to duty in
the Air Corps, and was progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant
(temporary) effective 1 June 1944. He performed duties as an Airplane and
Engine Mechanic. He was honorably discharged in the grade of private, on
21 November 1945, having accrued 2 years, 4 months and 19 days of total
active military service, of which 8 months and 28 days was foreign service.
He had 10 days’ lost time.
On 27 June 1945, two entries in his financial allotment portion of his
service record reflect his discontinuance of two savings allotments by
stated reason of reduction in grade.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPWB recommends the application be time barred. DPPPWB states that
the applicant's records reflect he was promoted from private to private
first class on 17 March 1943, to corporal on 27 May 1943, and to sergeant
(temporary) on 1 June 1944. On 25 June 1945, his service record shows his
rank as private. There are no documents to indicate why he was demoted to
private. DPPPWB states that based on extremely limited records and passage
of time, it is not possible to determine whether applicant's rank at time
of discharge was in error. The DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 9 July 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was sent to the
applicant for review and comment. As of this date, this office has not
received a 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of injustice. The documentation in his record clearly
establishes the applicant was promoted to sergeant (Temporary) on 1 June
1944. The Board majority also notes that on 26 June 1945, his service
record shows his rank was private. Based on the absence of any record of
company punishment or court-martial in the applicant’s existing records,
the fact that he served more than a year in the grade of sergeant, in view
of his character and efficiency ratings of satisfactory and excellent
throughout the time he served and, in particular, the “excellent” ratings
he received on 29 July 1945, the Board majority believes some doubt exists
of the propriety of the applicant’s separation in the grade of private.
The Board majority is of the opinion that, in view of the applicant’s
service to the Nation, any doubt in this matter should be resolved in favor
of the applicant. Therefore, the Board majority recommends his records be
corrected to the extent indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was promoted to the grade of
sergeant, effective 20 November 1945, and on
21 November 1945, he was honorably discharged in the grade of sergeant,
rather than private.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 01-02836 in
Executive Session on 11 August 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member
Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member
By a majority vote, the Board recommended approval of the application. Mr.
Markiewicz voted to deny the applicant’s request and elected to submit a
minority report, which is at Exhibit E. The following documentary evidence
was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 May 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 23 Jun 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jul 04.
Exhibit E. Minority Report, dated 16 Sep 04.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AFBCMR BC-2004-01683
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 xxxxxxxxxxx, be corrected to show that he was promoted to the
grade of sergeant, effective 20 November 1945, and on 21 November 1945, he
was honorably discharged in the grade of sergeant, rather than private.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR
CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)
SUBJECT: APPLICANT, DOCKET NO: BC-2004-01683
The applicant has requested that his discharge document reflect the
rank of sergeant versus private. The majority of the Board recommends
approval based on possible injustice. I respectfully disagree.
After careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the
available evidence of record, I see no evidence that would warrant approval
of the applicant’s request. The applicant’s service record does reflect
the applicant was promoted to sergeant (Temporary) on 1 June 1944.
However, his service records also clearly shows that at the time of his
discharge on 26 June 1945, he was serving in the grade of private because
of a demotion. There are no documents to indicate why he was demoted to
private nor does the applicant provide in my estimation the quality or
quantity of evidence to determine whether his rank at the time of discharge
was in error. I do note, however, he did have for reasons unknown, ten
days of lost time. In the absence of any documentation to the show the
available information is erroneous, I must assume he was discharged in the
correct grade.
In view of the above, I find that the applicant has not satisfied his
burden to show there has been an error or injustice.
Sincerely
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02285 INDEX CODE: 131.00, 131.05 APPLICANT COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His grade be corrected from technical sergeant (E-6) to master sergeant (E-7), effective 2 September 1945. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04088
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 6 February 2004 for review and response (Exhibit C). Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. Notwithstanding any argument concerning the highest grade the applicant held on active duty, the applicant’s separation document appears to indicate that he was...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01347
On 8 December 1945, he was relieved from active duty to accept appointment as a first lieutenant, Officers’ Reserve Corps, Army of the United States. DPPPR states that there is no evidence in the decedent’s records of a recommendation for, or award of, the DFC. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the FORMER MEMBER be corrected to show that he was awarded...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02685
On 3 May 2005, the commander notified the applicant of his intent to recommend demotion to the grade of senior airman (E-4) based on AFI 36- 2503, paragraph 3.3, Failure to Fulfill NCO Responsibilities, and AFI 36- 2618, The Enlisted Force Structure. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/JA recommends the application be denied. The AF/JA evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPPWB recommends the application be denied.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02504
When the applicant was selected for promotion to SSgt after having been previously demoted, the personnel system was not updated prior to his retirement orders being published. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03225
We find no evidence of error in this case, and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation provided in support of his appeal, we do not believe he has been the victim of an injustice. The Board notes that in accordance with the decision of the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council, the applicant's grade will be advanced to staff sergeant on the retired list for pay purposes on 10 January 2008. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02003
On 27 Aug 02, the applicant's request that he be reinstated to the grade of staff sergeant was considered and partially granted by the Board. JA states his current commander is correct that AFI 35-205 does not prohibit Airmen from promotion consideration when they are returned to duty after completing the RTDP. The JA evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: His return to duty and suspended...
Prior to the events under review, the applicant was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-4) on 1 August 1953 and thereafter to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5), effective and with a date of rank of 1 October 1955. The board’s recommendations were approved and on 21 October 1957, orders were issued announcing the applicant’s demotion to the grade of airman first class (E-3) with a date of rank of 1 August 1953. Although the applicant claims the demotion was...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02361
By letter, dated 5 October 1961, the Personnel Services Division, advised the applicant that the 722d Bomb Squadron, 450th Bomb Group was authorized the following campaigns: Air Offensive Europe, Naples-Foggia, Rome Arno and Air Combat, European-African-Middle Eastern Theater. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02463
The applicant states that based on his completion of the requisite training and service as a B-24, Liberator, radio operator/gunner in Italy, he was eligible for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant prior to his discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 18 November 1945, he was promoted to the grade of...