RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          25 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040009550


      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. Richard P. Nelson             |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Margaret K. Patterson         |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Ronald E. Blakely             |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Linda M. Baker                |     |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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of
the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show that he served
in the rank of acting sergeant.

2.  The applicant states that he is proud of his service and of being
discharged as an acting sergeant.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and 553d Service
Company Unit Orders Number 5, dated 18 July 1967, appointing him to the
grade of acting sergeant under the provisions of paragraph 7-10a, Army
Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System).  The applicant
also includes a copy of Headquarters, III Corps Temporary Duty Letter Order
Number 1969, dated 31 October 1967, in which the applicant’s rank and grade
are listed as sergeant, E-5 in the standard name line.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error that
occurred on 14 December 1967.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 25 October 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’s military personnel records show that he was inducted on
15 December 1965 and trained as an Armor Intelligence Specialist.  He
served in Thailand, and then returned to Fort Hood, Texas, where he
completed his service obligation and was honorably separated on 14 December
1967 in pay grade E-4. His separation physical, completed in his own hand
and dated 18 October 1967, shows his grade as E-4.

4.  Headquarters, III Corps Special Orders 295, dated 8 December 1967,
announced the release from active duty of the applicant in the rank and
grade of specialist, E-4.

5.  Headquarters, 13th Support Brigade, dated 21 November 1967, announced
award of the Good Conduct Medal to the applicant.  These orders show his
rank and grade as specialist, E-4.

6.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) provides that the active
duty grade or rank and pay grade at the time of separation will be entered
on an individual’s DD Form 214.  There are no provisions in the regulation
for the entry of an acting grade or rank on the DD Form 214.

7.  Paragraph 7-10a, Army Regulation 600-200, in effect at the time,
allowed for the appointment of acting noncommissioned officers of qualified
individuals as acting corporals and acting sergeants to fill existing
vacancies in units of company, troop, and battery levels.  Acting
noncommissioned officers were allowed to wear the regular insignia of grade
of the rank to which they were appointed however, the acting
noncommissioned officers were not entitled to pay and allowances of such
higher grades and service in an acting grade was not credited as time in a
higher grade fro promotion or date of rank purposes.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  While the applicant has provided documentation that shows he was
appointed an acting sergeant, E-5, there is no indication that he was ever
temporarily or permanently promoted to sergeant, E-5.  Therefore, the rank
and pay grade of specialist four, E-4 currently shown on the applicant’s DD
Form 214 is correct.

2.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in
error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would
satisfy this requirement.

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant's request.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 14 December 1967; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 13 December 1970.  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

____mkp   ____reb__  ___lmb__  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.




            ____Margaret K. Patterson__________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040009550                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/08/25                              |
|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.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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