RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           5 May 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040007827


      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             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James E. Anderholm            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Leonard G. Hassell            |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Laverne V. Berry              |     |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, in effect, that his records be corrected to
show his rank as Sergeant (SGT), E-5.

2.  The applicant states that his records do not show the fact he was
appointed a temporary acting noncommissioned officer (NCO) SGT on 26 April
1967.  The NCO appointment was continuous, even after he was appointed to
temporary Specialist Five (SP5), E-5 on 13 September 1967.  He would like
his records corrected to reflect that the highest grade he held was SGT so,
when he wears his uniform for ceremonial purposes at veterans' functions,
he does not have his uniform insignia questioned.

3.  The applicant provides his acting SGT orders, a copy of his military
identification card with an expiration date of 21 May 1969, an extract from
Department of the Army Pamphlet 21-8 (Once a Soldier); and his honorable
discharge certificate.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on   22 February 1972, the date he was discharged from the U. S.
Army Reserve.  The application submitted in this case is dated 17 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 limitation 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 Regular Army on 23 February 1966 for 3
years.  He was promoted to Specialist Four, E-4 on 26 January 1967 in
military occupational specialty 71H (Personnel Specialist).

4.  Headquarters and Headquarters Detachment, 72d Signal Battalion
(Germany) Unit Order Number 28 dated 26 April 1967 appointed the applicant
to be an acting SGT.  He was issued a military identification card on 2 May
1967 which shows his rank as SGT, E-5.

5.  On 13 September 1967, the applicant was promoted to SP5.

6.  The applicant departed Germany in October 1967 and was assigned to
Vietnam on or about 3 December 1967.  Headquarters, U. S. Army Vietnam
Transient Detachment Special Orders Number 268 dated 3 December 1967 shows
his rank as SP5.

7.  The applicant was released from active duty on 4 November 1968 and
transferred to the U. S. Army Reserve.  His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of
the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows his rank as SP5.
Item 2 (Grade) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows his
rank as SP5.  Item 3 (Appointments and Reductions) shows his rank as SP5
and does not show his appointment as an acting SGT.

8.  On 22 February 1972, the applicant was discharged from the U. S. Army
Reserve.  His discharge certificate shows his rank as SP5.

9.  Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System) at the
time, chapter 7 provided policy and procedures governing the promotion and
reduction of enlisted Soldiers.  Paragraph 7-11 stated that company and
detachment commanders could appoint acting SGTs to fill position vacancies
existing in their units.  Acting NCOs could wear either the regular
insignia of grade permanently affixed to the sleeve or acting NCO
brassards.  Acting NCOs were not entitled to pay and allowances of such
higher grades and service as an acting NCO would not be credited as time in
a higher grade for appointment or date of rank purposes.  An acting NCO's
status would be terminated for one of several reasons, including upon
reassignment to another unit.

10.  At the time, Army Regulation 600-200, chapter 9 provided policy and
procedures for preparation of the DA Form 20.  In pertinent part, it stated
that each permanent and temporary grade of rank and pay grade to which
appointed or reduced would be entered in item 33.  It did not provide for
the entry of acting appointments to be entered.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board understands the applicant's desire to have his records
corrected to show he held the rank of SGT.  However, he was an acting SGT
only for the period of time he was assigned to the unit that appointed him
to that acting grade.  He was not entitled to pay and allowances of that
grade until he was promoted to SP5 (despite his military identification
card, which was issued before he was promoted to SP5, showing his rank and
grade as "SGT E5").

2.  Regulatory guidance did not provide for the entry of acting NCO
appointments to be entered on the DA Form 20, and the applicant's acting
SGT status should have been terminated when he was reassigned out of the
unit.  For the reason that his acting SGT status should have been
terminated when he departed from the unit, it appears that his discharge
certificate properly reflects the rank, SP5, he held at the time of his
discharge from the U. S. Army Reserve.

3.  Regrettably, there is insufficient basis on which to correct the
applicant's records.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 22 February 1972, the date he was
discharged from the U. S. Army Reserve; therefore, the time for the
applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on 21 February 1975. 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

__jea___  __lgh___  __lvb___  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.




            __James E. Anderholm__
                    CHAIRPERSON


                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040007827                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050505                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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