RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        14 JUNE 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040007618


      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.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock             |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. John Slone                    |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Hubert Fry                    |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Linda Simmons                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or
Discharge) be corrected to show his pay grade as E-4, vice the pay grade of
E-3 shown.

2.  The applicant states that he was paid as an E-4 for approximately 4
months; however, his DD Form 214 shows his pay grade as E-3.

3.  The applicant provides no evidence.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 8 August 1962.  The application submitted in this case is
dated       16 September 2004.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for
correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery
of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Illinois Army National Guard for 3 years
on         15 June 1959 in pay grade E-1.  He attended training at Fort
Ord, California for    5 months and 23 days and was released from active
duty in the pay grade of      E-2 on 18 December 1959.  On 20 February 1961
he was discharged from the Illinois Army National Guard due to his
relocation from the state, and transferred to the XX Army Control Group in
Ohio.  His rank on his report of separation is shown as Private First Class
(pay grade E-3).

4.  The applicant attended training at Fort Lewis, Washington for 9 months
and   8 days and was released from active duty in the pay grade of E-3 on 8
August 1962, and transferred to the Army Reserve Control Group (Annual
Training),     XI Army Corps (Reserve).

5.  The applicant’s military pay voucher for the pay period 1 July 1962 to
           8 August 1962 shows that his basic pay grade was E-3.

6.  On 4 December 1962 the applicant was transferred to the Standby
Reserve.  His rank on the document effecting that transfer is shown as
Private First Class.

7.  The applicant’s service records (DA Forms 24) show that the highest
grade that he held was Private First Class, E-3.  The documents contained
in his OMPF (official military personnel file), some of which he completed
and signed, reflect no grade higher than E-3.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no evidence and the applicant has not submitted any to show
that he served in the pay grade of E-4 or was promoted to that pay grade.
To the contrary, the evidence reflects that the highest pay grade that the
applicant attained during his military service was E-3.

2.  Therefore, the applicant’s contention is not accepted.  His request to
correct his DD Form 214 to show his pay grade as E-4 is denied.

3.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 8 August 1962; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on           7 August 1965.  However, the applicant did not file
within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling
explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice
to excuse failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___JS___  ___HF __  ___LS___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




                                  _______John Slone________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040007618                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050614                                |
|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.       |129.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]