RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03605
            INDEX CODE:  128.05
      XXXXXXXXXXXX     COUNSEL:  NOT INDICATED

      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX   HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  17 JAN 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show he was discharged  in  the  grade  of
technical sergeant.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was selected to go before the direct commissioning Board,  but  due
to an error  in  the  orders  he  was  sent  to  the  wrong  base  and
subsequently the direct commissioning board was not available.  He was
then selected to attend Officer Candidacy School  (OCS);  however,  he
was eligible for discharge after the war ended and elected  to  resign
from OCS.

In  support  of  his  request,  the  applicant  provided  a   personal
statement, a copy of his  Honorable  Discharge  Certificate,  excerpts
from his military personnel records, Army  Regulation  625-5,  Officer
Candidates, and WD AFO Form  53-55,  Enlisted  Record  and  Report  of
Separation Honorable Discharge.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The former member’s military personnel records were destroyed by  fire
in 1973 at the  National  Personnel  Records  Center.   His  available
records reflect he enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 March 1941,  for
a period of three years and was progressively promoted to the grade of
technical sergeant.

The applicant was selected to attend OCS with a class start date of 19
Apr 1945.  On 19 June 1945, the applicant resigned from OCS and  on  3
July 1945, was reduced to the grade of private with an effective  date
of 3 July 1945.  On 20 September 1945, he was honorably discharged for
Convenience of the Government (Demobilization).

The applicant enlisted in the Army Reserves on 20 September 1945,  for
a period of three years and was discharged on 19 September 1948 in the
grade of private.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

DPPPWB recommends denial.  DPPPWB states the application was not filed
within the three-year time limitation  imposed  by  AFI  36-2303,  Air
Force Board for Correction of  Military  Records,  (AFBCMR)  paragraph
3.5, 1 March 1996.  In addition to being untimely under the statute of
limitations, the applicant’s request may also be dismissed  under  the
equitable doctrine of laches, which  denies  relief  to  one  who  has
unreasonably  delayed  asserting  a  claim.   Laches  consist  of  two
elements; inexcusable delay and prejudice to the Air  Force  resulting
there from.

According to DPPPWB the applicant waited  more  than  59  years  after
discharge to petition the AFBCMR.  This unreasonable  delay  has  also
caused prejudice to the  Air  Force  as  relevant  records  have  been
destroyed or  are  no  longer  available,  memories  have  failed  and
witnesses are unavailable.

DPPPWB states that according to the applicant  the  point  system  was
announced with eligibility for discharge being 80 or more points.   He
states he had 98 points at that time.  DPPPWB states  that  office  is
not aware of the point system in which the applicant is referring.

According to DPPPWB Army Regulation 625-5, dated  12  September  1944,
paragraph 14 states “Disposition  of  nongraduates…Non  graduates  who
were transferred to schools from overseas theaters and who voluntarily
resigned from school or intentionally failed  to  meet  OCS  standards
will be  reduced  to  grade  seven  and  transferred  to  the  nearest
personnel replacement depot of their  arm  or  service  for  immediate
reassignment overseas”.

DPPPWB states a review of  the  applicant’s  record  reflects  he  was
promoted to staff sergeant on 10  August  1942.   Special  Order  184,
dated 3 July 1945, announces  the  reduction  of  the  applicant  from
technical  sergeant  to  private,  based  on  his  resignation  as  an
Administrative Officer Candidate.

DPPPWB states in absence of any  documentation  to  the  contrary  the
assumption is that the applicant was discharged in the correct grade.

The DPPAE evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________



APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states  he  was  promoted  to  the  grade  of  technical
sergeant in January 1943.  He believes he has provided enough  factual
documentation to prove his case.  He resigned from OCS, because he was
eligible for discharge based on having 98 points, which  is  reflected
on his honorable discharge certificate.  He has provided documentation
that explains the point system.  He  states  he  was  selected  to  go
before Gen Spatz’s  direct  commissioning  board  for  appointment  to
second lieutenant.  The teletype message shows an error was  made  and
he was mistakenly sent  to  the  wrong  base.   Because  there  wasn’t
another meeting scheduled his unit did the next best  thing  and  sent
him to OCS.  He believes if this mistake had not been  made  he  would
not have returned to the states to attend OCS.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.   The  Board  notes  insufficient
evidence has been provided which would lead us  to  believe  that  the
rules of the applicable regulations were  inappropriately  applied  or
that the applicant  was  denied  rights  to  which  he  was  entitled.
Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendations 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.  In the absence of persuasive evidence  to  the
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought  in
this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of 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-2005-
03605 in Executive Session on 27 April 2006 under  the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Chair
                 Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member
                 Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Nov 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 14 Dec 05.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Jan 06.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 23 Jan 06, w/atchs.





                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair