| Mr. Loren G. Harrell | Director | |
| Ms. Stephanie Thompkins | Analyst |
| Mr. Luther Santiful | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Robert W. Santiful | Member | |
| Mr. Curtis L. Greenway | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction to his grade on his discharge (NGB Form 22), effective 4 April 1994, to show Specialist (E-4) vice Private (E-2).
APPLICANT STATES: During an investigation for discrimination, it was discovered and recommended that his grade be reflected as E-4 at his expiration term of service (ETS) and submitted to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. A copy of this action was not provided to the Board.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Tennessee Army National Guard (ARNG) as a E-2, on 5 April 1988. He attained the rank of E-4 on 15 January 1991. He served on active duty from 22 January 1991 to 16 June 1991 in support of Desert Shield/Storm. He was separated from active duty in pay grade E-4 and returned to his home unit.
He was honorably separated from the Tennessee ARNG on 4 April 1994, in the grade of E-2 and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).
His records do not contain a date or reason for his reduction from E-4 to E-2.
He enlisted in the ARNG as an E-2 on 27 March 1995, with a 1 year and 1 week enlistment option. He was promoted to private first class (E-3) on 7 May 1995.
He was honorably separated on 4 April 1996, for expiration of service obligation. His NGB Form 22 shows his grade at the time of separation as E-3.
In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) was obtained from the Tennessee ARNG, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel stating that a review of the only available records at the War Records Division did not reveal any information concerning the applicant’s request for reinstatement to the rank of specialist nor the reason why he was reduced in rank. A copy of the report of investigation that the applicant referred to in his application was not enclosed with the DD Form 149. An inquiry into the matter with a former
Personnel Staff NCO for the battalion to which the applicant was assigned revealed that she thought that he was AWOL from some unit training assemblies immediately upon return from mobilization to Desert Shield/Storm in 1991 and that could have been the reason for reduction.
This Board presumes administrative regularity in the processing of the applicant's reduction in rank. The burden of proof to show otherwise rests with the applicant.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:
1. In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to correction to his rank. He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.
2. There is no evidence of record to substantiate the applicant’s claim that an investigation determined that his grade be reflected as E-4 at his ETS. He has not provided the Board with a copy of the report nor the recommendation.
3. His contentions have been noted by the Board; however, they are not sufficiently supported by his records or his application. The Board concludes that the applicant was reduced in grade and properly separated as an E-2 on 4 April 1994. He has not shown otherwise and the Board presumes regularity in this case. There is nothing in the available records or in anything submitted by the applicant to overcome that presumption.
4. It is further concluded that the applicant was promoted to E-3 and his discharge correctly reflects his grade as E-3 at his ETS on 4 April 1996.
5. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.
6. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
LS______ RWG___ CLG ____ DENY APPLICATION
Loren G. Harrell
Director
| CASE ID | AC |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | YYYYMMDD |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709799C070209
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES: During an investigation for discrimination, it was discovered and recommended that his grade be reflected as E-4 at his expiration term of service (ETS) and submitted to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: He enlisted in the Tennessee Army National Guard (ARNG) as a E-2, on 5 April 1988.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710210
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That her military records be corrected to show that she was separated from active duty by reason of physical disability. On 14 June 1994 she submitted an application to this Board requesting that her separation document (DD Form 214) reflect the dates that her unit served in the Persian Gulf. Accordingly, there is no basis on which to grant counsel’s request to show that she was promoted to pay grade E-5 at the time of her separation from active duty.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608054C070209
Notwithstanding the presence, or possible presence, of various medical conditions, there is no evidence of record, nor has the applicant provided sufficient evidence, which would indicate that she suffered from any medical condition of such severity that she was rendered unable to reasonably perform the duties of her office, rank, grade or rating. An award of a VA rating does not establish entitlement to medical retirement or separation from the Army. The Army must find that a service...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050009969
Larry W. Racster | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Given there is no apparent error or injustice related to the lack of a record entry regarding Operation Desert Shield/Storm in the applicant's record, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 12 November...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088058C070403
The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected to show award of the Southwest Asia Service Medal (SWASM). The applicant's records contain a DD Form 214 covering the applicant's service from 29 May 1990 through 24 September 1994. The Board also determined that the applicant's DD Form 214 should be corrected to show his service in Southwest Asia.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014684C071108
The applicant states, in effect, that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) be corrected to show that he served during Operation Desert Storm/Desert Shield. Evidence shows that while the applicant was on active duty during the period 2 August 1990 through 15 October 1995, he was not assigned to duty in a designated area in Southwest Asia (SWA). The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199706823
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. On 1 September 1998 the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000567C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 October 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050000567 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with a separation date...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040002023C070208
The applicant requests that his record be corrected to show three awards of the Army Commendation Medal, two awards of the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal, award of the Armed Forces Reserve Medal with M device, and award of the Kuwait Liberation Medal. The applicant was awarded the second award of the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal for the four-year period ending in March 1993, after his release from active duty on 17 August 1991. The Board determined that the evidence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074859C070403
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That he be issued a separation document for the time he served in Operation Desert Storm, from July to December 1991. In support of his request the applicant submits Leave and Earnings Statements showing he was paid from 21 July to 31 December 1991; he submits other financial documents which show he was on active duty during the time in question; he submits the certificate for the Army Commendation Medal he was awarded for his service in a unit in support of Operation...