RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        28 September 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060003492


      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             |
|     |Ms. Beverly A. Young              |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Linda Simmons                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Paul Smith                    |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Alice Muellerweiss            |     |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 records to show he was placed
on the retired list in the rank of sergeant first class (SFC), pay grade E-
7.  He also requests that he receive SFC, E-7 retired pay.

2.  The applicant states he receives staff sergeant (SSG), E-6 retired pay
when he should receive SFC, E-7 retired pay.

3.  The applicant provides his NGB Form 22 (National Guard Bureau Report of
Separation and Record of Service) for the period ending 3 January 1956; his
NGB Form 22 for the period ending 10 April 1957; and pages from his DA Form
24 (Service Record).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of alleged errors which occurred

on 26 November 1990.  The application submitted in this case is dated
28 February 2006.

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 was born on 26 November 1930.  He initially enlisted in
the Army National Guard on 22 September 1947 and was discharged on
21 September 1950.  He reenlisted in the Army National Guard on 22
September 1950 and was discharged on 21 September 1953.

4.  He reenlisted in the Army National Guard on 22 September 1953.

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army National Guard on 3 January
1956.  His NGB Form 22 for the period ending 3 January 1956 shows his grade
as “SFC” in item 3 (Grade) and item 30 (Highest Grade Held).

6.  He reenlisted in the Army National Guard on 4 January 1956.

7.  Section 1 (Appointments, Promotions, or Reductions) on his DA Form 24
shows he was promoted to the permanent rank of SFC on 4 January 1956 based
on National Guard Regulation 25-1, paragraph 17b(4).

8.  The applicant was discharged on 10 April 1957.  His NGB Form 22 for the
period ending 10 April 1957 shows his grade as “SFC” in item 3 and his
highest grade held as “SFC” in item 30.

9.  After a break in service, the applicant enlisted in the Army National
Guard on 24 September 1974.

10.  Item 18 (Appointments and Reductions) on the applicant’s DA Form 2-1
(Personnel Qualification Record - Part II) shows his grade as “SSG” with a
date of rank of 24 September 1974.

11.  The applicant was discharged on 19 July 1983.  His NGB Form 22 for the
period ending 19 July 1983 shows his rank as “SSG” in item 5a (Rank) and
pay grade as “E-6” in item 5b (Pay Grade).

12.  He reenlisted in the Army National Guard on 20 July 1983 and was
discharged on 7 June 1984.  His NGB Form 22 for the period ending 7 June
1984 shows his rank as “SSG” in item 5a and his pay grade as “E-6” in item
5b.

13.  The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard on 8 June 1984 and
continued to serve in this component.

14.  Headquarters, Oregon Army National Guard Orders Number 234-6, dated
4 December 1990, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard on
30 November 1990 and transferred him to the U.S. Army Reserve (Retired) on
the day following.  These orders show his rank as “SSG” on the standard
name line.

15.  The applicant’s DA Form 3713 (Data for Retired Pay), dated 25 February
1991, shows his retired grade and his highest grade attained as E-6.  This
document shows his retired pay would be based on pay grade E-6.

16.  Department of the Army, U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Center Orders
Number P-02-002415, dated 25 February 1991, retired the applicant and
placed him on the retired list on 26 November 1990 in the retired rank of
SSG.

17.  A Conversion Chart of Pay Grade of Enlisted Personnel shows that
during the period of 1 October 1949 to 31 May 1958 noncommissioned officers
in pay grade E-6 would retain the title of SFC or Specialist First (SP1)
Class.  After 31 May 1958, noncommissioned officers in pay grade E-6 held
the title of SSG and in pay grade E-7 held the title of SFC or Platoon
Sergeant.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was promoted to SFC on 4 January 1956.  At that time, the
equivalent pay grade for a SFC was E-6.

2.  The applicant’s Personnel Qualification Record shows his rank as SSG as
of 24 September 1974.

3.  Although the applicant held the rank of SFC, that rank was the
equivalent of pay grade E-6.  The Conversion Chart of Pay Grade of Enlisted
Personnel shows the title for noncommissioned officers in pay grade E-6
changed from SFC to SSG in 1958.

4.  The applicant retired on 26 November 1990 and held the rank and grade
of SSG, E-6 on the date of his retirement.

5.  There is no error or injustice in this case regarding the applicant’s
retired grade and there is no basis to show he was placed on the retired
list in the rank of SFC, E-7 or to pay him SFC, E-7 retired pay.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 26 November 1990; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 25 November 1993.  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

LS______  PM______  AM______  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.




                                  Linda Simmons_________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060003492                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060928                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |129.0400                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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