| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member | ||
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that the rank, pay grade, and middle name recorded in his separation documents (DD Forms 214) be corrected.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that the rank and pay grade listed in his last
DD Form 214 should be corrected to sergeant/E-5 (SGT/E-5) and the middle name listed should be corrected to read Donnell. In support of his application, he submits copies of two DD Forms 214.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He entered the Army on 31 December 1975 and was honorably discharged on 28 March 1979. He immediately reenlisted on 29 March 1979 and served until being honorably discharged at his expiration of term of service (ETS) on
25 March 1982.
The applicant’s record shows that he was trained and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 36K (Tactical Wire Operations Specialist) and that during his active duty tenure he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Marksman Qualification Badge (Rifle & Hand Grenade), and Overseas Ribbon (2).
The Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1) prepared on the applicant on 6 July 1976, and last reviewed by him on 8 January 1982 contains the middle name that was listed in his enlistment contract, which he now claims is incorrect. In addition, all the orders and other official documents prepared on the applicant throughout his active duty tenure all listed this same middle name that he now claims is incorrect.
Item 18 (Appointments and Reductions) of the applicant’s DA Form 2-1 shows that the highest rank and pay grade he attained while serving on active duty was specialist four/E-4 (SP4/E-4) and that he actually held the rank and pay grade of private first class/E-3 (PFC/E-3) on the date of his final separation from the Army. The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no documents or orders that give any indication that he was ever promoted to the rank and pay grade of SGT/E-5.
The applicant’s last separation document, which he authenticated with
his signature on the date of his separation, 25 March 1982, confirms in
Item 1 (Last Name, First Name, Middle Name) lists the middle name that he used throughout his active duty service and which is listed in his enlistment contract and in his personnel service record. In addition, Items 4a and 4b confirm that he held the rank and pay grade of PFC/E-3 at the time of his separation.
Army Regulation 635-5 prescribes the separation documents which are prepared for individuals upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army. It establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. Paragraph 2-4, states in effect, that the active duty grade of rank and pay grade at the time of separation will be entered on the separation document.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The Board notes the contention of the applicant that his rank and pay grade at the time of his separation is incorrect and should be corrected to read SGT/E-5, however, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2. By regulation, the active duty grade of rank and pay grade at the time of separation will be entered on the separation document. The evidence of record gives no indication the applicant was ever promoted or actually held the rank and pay grade of SGT/E-5 while on active duty, and confirms that he held the rank and pay grade of PFC/E-3 on the date of his separation. Therefore, the Board concludes there is insufficient evidence to support this requested relief.
3. The Board also notes and understands the applicant’s desire to have the middle name recorded in his military records changed to his birth middle name. However, there is no evidence of record or independent evidence that suggests the middle name recorded in his military records exhibits a material error or injustice. Further, the Board finds an insufficient evidentiary basis to conclude the applicant has suffered or would suffer an injury or injustice as a result of the Army maintaining its records with the middle name under which he served.
4. The Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records. The data and information contained in those records should reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created. While the Board understands the applicant’s desire to have the records changed, it finds no compelling reason for compromising the integrity of the Army’s records.
5. The Board wishes to advise the applicant that a copy of this decisional document along with his application and the supporting evidence he provided, will be filed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). This should serve to clarify any questions or confusion in regard to the difference in his current middle name and the middle name recorded in his military record, and satisfy his desire to have his current middle name documented in his OMPF.
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
__AAO__ __KWL__ __DPH__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002074753 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/09/24 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 100.0100 |
| 2. | 131.0000 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011581
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009754
The applicants record contains a DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States) which shows she enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 9 March 2010. Item 1 (Name) shows her last name as Da S____. 2. The evidence of record confirms in all available documents that her last name is Da S____. As such, it would be appropriate to amend item 1 of her DD Form 214 to show the correct last name.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080003161
The applicants complete military records are not available to the Board. A DA Form 2496 (Disposition Form), dated 13 May 1982, in the applicants service personnel records, recommends removal of his bar to reenlistment and his rank is shown as PFC. Department of the Army, U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Center, St. Louis, Missouri Orders D-02-012346, dated 18 February 1986, discharged the applicant from the Ready Reserve effective 19 February 1986 in the rank of SP4.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068774C070402
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his rank, pay grade, and social security account number (SSAN) listed on his separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: In this case, the applicant has provided no evidence to suggest that the SSAN listed in his records was in error while he was performing his military service, or that maintaining this SSAN in his records would cause him any injustice.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016769
The applicant's rank/grade appears as CPL on: * a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), signed by him on 20 February 1992 * separation orders, dated 24 March 1992 * a DA Form 2A (Personnel Qualification Record, Part 1), dated 18 June 1992, showing he was promotable 8. The applicant's record contains no evidence and he has failed to provide any evidence showing he was promoted to the rank/grade of SGT/E-5. Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his records to show he was promoted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130021372
The applicant, the daughter of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests correction of her father's WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation-Honorable Discharge) for the period ending 22 March 1947 to show his middle name and to show his rank as staff sergeant (S/SGT) instead of private first class (PFC). The available evidence shows that at the time of the FSM's discharge on 28 October 1945, his rank was PFC, which is reflected on his WD AGO Form 53-55 covering...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066721C070402
The applicant states, in effect, that the highest rank the FSM held during his active duty tenure was SGT. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that the highest grade the FSM held on active duty was SGT and it carefully considered the documents submitted by the applicant to support her claim. During the processing of this case, the Board did find that the FSM was awarded the BSM based on having earned the CIB during World War II.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010275
The applicant states, in effect, that he is providing a certified copy of a BSM certificate that confirms he received this award while serving in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), and is requesting to be awarded the CIB based on his qualifying infantry combat service in the RVN. The applicant's record contains Headquarters, United States Army Personnel Center, Oakland, California, Special Orders Number 338, dated 3 December 1968, which directed his relief from active duty (REFRAD) and transfer...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073392C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant held the rank and pay grade of PFC/E-3 on 2 December 1989, the last date he was discharged from active duty. Further, the applicant failed to provide any related ARNG records or evidence to show there was an error in any of the GT scores recorded in the records on file.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009735