RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS



IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-00606

            INDEX CODE:      107.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect his rank as  captain  rather  than
first lieutenant and the  Distinguished  Flying  Cross  (DFC)  he  was
previously awarded.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The 93rd Bomb Group Records were left in England and his records  were
lost in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC).
 Upon completion of the 6 Apr 45 mission at Halle M/Y, where he became
the defacto 93rd Group Deputy Lead, he was recommended for a  DFC  and
captaincy.

In support of  his  request,  applicant  submits  a  letter  from  the
National Personnel Records Center, dated 5 Feb  07,  Certification  of
Military Service, dated February 2007 and copy of Military Record  and
Report  of  Separation  Certificate  of  Service,  excerpts  from  his
military personnel records and  background  information  detailing  17
missions he participated in during WWII.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s  reconstructed  military  personnel  records  reflect   he
enlisted in the Army Air Corps on 12 May 43, and was discharged on  30
Jun  43  to  accept  a  commission.   He  was  commissioned  a  second
lieutenant, was subsequently promoted to the grade of first lieutenant
and was discharged on 6 Nov 45, in that grade.

He participated in the Ardennes, Central Europe, Northern  France  and
Germany campaigns.  His report of separation  reflects  award  of  the
European African Middle-Eastern Ribbon, with 4 Bronze  Stars  (w/4 BS)
and the Air Medal with One Oak Leaf Cluster (AM w/1 OLC).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

SAF/MRBP recommends denial.  SAF/MRBP states  in  part  the  NPRC  was
unable to provide a complete copy of the applicant’s personnel record,
because it was destroyed in the 1973 fire.  There is no documentation,
other than the applicant’s assertion, that he  was  being  recommended
for a DFC and  promotion  to  the  grade  of  captain.   There  is  no
documented evidence of a substantial event  that  would  rise  to  the
level of a DFC on merit alone.

Based on the applicant’s documentation,  there  is  no  evidence  that
would substantiate changing his record, to include a change in rank or
award of a DFC.

The SAF/MRBP evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  applicant  states  he  provided  documentation  on  17  completed
missions and three were not recorded, because he did not make it  back
to his base.  The basis for his request for promotion was  that  after
his sixth mission, he became the only officer rated with two  military
occupation specialties (MOS’s).  The basis for his DFC award was  that
by warning the squadrons and groups following him they continued on to
the correct dropping point, thereby saving many  tons  of  bombs  from
being wasted.

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

________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOO  recommends  denial.   DPSOO  states  in  part,  that   the
applicant has not provided any documentation to support his contention
that he was recommended for promotion to the  grade  of  captain.   In
addition, there is nothing in his record to show  he  was  recommended
for promotion or that he was even eligible for promotion  to  captain.
In addition, given the unlikelihood of success on  the  merits,  DPSOO
strongly recommends the Board find
that it would not be in the interest of justice  to  excuse  the  time
delay, and deny the application as untimely

The AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is attached at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Additional Air Force evaluation was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 12 Oct 07, for review and comment within 30 days.  As of
this date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  After a thorough review  of  the
applicant’s submission and the available evidence of  record,  we  are
not persuaded that he should be awarded the requested relief.  We took
notice of the complete submission in judging the merits of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinions and  recommendations  of  the  Air
Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their  rationale  as
the basis for our conclusion that  the  applicant  has  not  been  the
victim of an error or an injustice.   In  the  absence  of  persuasive
evidence to the contrary, we find no  compelling  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-2007-
00606 in Executive Session on 13 Dec 07, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
                 Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
                 Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Feb 07, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBP, dated 1 Jun 07.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Jun 07, w/atchs.
      Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 25 Jun 07, w/atchs.
      Exhibit F. Letter, DPSOO, dated 1 Oct 07.
      Exhibit G. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Oct 07.




      LAURENCE M. GRONER
      Panel Chair