RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  28 August 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070002575 


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Mr. John J. Wendland, Jr.

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Paul M. Smith

Chairperson

Mr. Rodney E. Barber

Member

Mr. Rowland C. Heflin

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 discharge document be corrected to show his rank as chief warrant officer three (CW3)/pay grade W-3.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was promoted to the rank of CW3 as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army on 25 September 1978, but his discharge document shows his rank as chief warrant officer two (CW2)/pay grade W-2.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), with effective date of 29 June 1971; and Headquarters, Department of the Army, Office of the Adjutant General, Reserve Components Personnel and Administration Center, AGUZ-PD-PN,
St. Louis, Missouri, memorandum, dated 25 September 1978, subject: Promotion as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's military service records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years on 1 March 1955.  Upon completion of basic combat training and advanced individual training, the applicant was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 671.10 (Airplane Mechanic).  He was honorably released from active duty on 28 February 1958, after completing 3 years net active service, and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) where he served until 28 February 1963.  On 24 October 1963, the applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard of the United States, entered active duty on 13 May 1968, and served in MOS 67N (UH-1 Helicopter Repairman).  On 9 May 1969, the applicant was honorably discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment as a Warrant Officer Candidate.  On 17 May 1970, the applicant was honorably discharged for the purpose of appointment as a Reserve warrant officer.
3.  On 18 May 1970, the applicant was appointed as a warrant officer in the USAR, in the rank of warrant officer one (WO1)/pay grade W-1, with concurrent call to active duty.  The applicant was awarded MOS 100B (Rotary Wing Pilot) and served in the Republic of Vietnam from 24 June 1970 through 18 Jun 1971.

4.  The applicant's military service records contain a copy of Headquarters,
23rd Infantry Division (Americal) (Vietnam), Special Orders Number 138 (Extract), dated 18 May 1971, which show he was promoted from grade WO1 to grade CW2 in the Army of the United States, effective and with a date of rank of 18 May 1971.

5.  The applicant's military service records contain a copy of a DD Form 214, with an effective date of 29 Jun 1971, which shows that he entered active service on 18 May 1970 and served as a USAR warrant officer in MOS 100B.  Item 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank) contains the entry “CW2”; Item 5b (Pay Grade) contains the entry “W-2”; and Item 6 (Date of Rank) contains the entry “18 May 71.”  This document also shows that the applicant was honorably released from active duty on 29 June 1971 after completing 1 year, 1 month, and 12 days active service.

6.  The applicant's military service records contain a copy of Headquarters, Department of the Army, Office of the Adjutant General, Reserve Components Personnel and Administration Center, AGUZ-PD-PN, St. Louis, Missouri, memorandum, dated 25 September 1978, subject: Promotion as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army.  This memorandum shows, in pertinent part, that the applicant was promoted as a Reserve Warrant Officer in the Army to the grade of CW3 (W-3) on 25 September 1978.

7.  The applicant's military service records contain a copy Headquarters, Department of the Army, U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Center (Provisional), DARP-MSR-R, St. Louis, Missouri, Orders Number C-12-913761, dated
30 December 1983.  These orders show the applicant was serving in the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement), in the grade of CW3, and assigned to the USAR Control Group (Retired), effective 30 December 1983.

8.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations - Separation Documents), in effect at the time of the applicant's separation from active duty, prescribed policies and procedures regarding separation documents.  It also established standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  This Army regulation states that the purpose of a separation document is to provide the individual with documentary evidence of their military service at the time of separation; therefore, it is important the information entered thereon is complete and accurate as of that date.  Section III (Instructions for Preparation and Distribution of the Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) contains guidance on the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It states, in pertinent part, that all available records will be used as a basis for the preparation of the DD Form 214, including the Enlisted Qualification Record, Officer Qualification Record, and orders.  Paragraph 23 provides instructions for completing Item 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank), Item 5b (Pay Grade), and Item 6 (Date of Rank) and states for these items, “Self-explanatory.”

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends, in effect, that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show that he was serving in the grade of CW3 at the time of his release from active duty on 29 June 1971.  However, the applicant provides insufficient documentary evidence in support of his claim.

2.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant was promoted to the grade of CW2 as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army on 18 May 1971 and released from active duty in the grade of CW2 on 29 June 1971.  The evidence of record also shows that, subsequent to the applicant's release from active duty (i.e., on 25 September 1978), he was promoted to the grade of CW3 as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army.  Thus, Item 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank), Item 5b (Pay Grade), and Item 6 (Date of Rank) of his DD Form 214 correctly show the applicant’s (then current) grade (i.e., CW2), pay grade (i.e., W-2), and date of rank (i.e.,18 May 1971) at the time he was released from active duty on 29 June 1971.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to correction of his DD Form 214.

3.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant was promoted to the grade of CW3 as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army on 25 September 1978 and orders assigned him to the USAR Control Group (Retired), in the grade of CW3, effective 30 December 1983.  Therefore, the evidence of record also shows that the applicant’s military service records correctly document his grade at the time he was assigned to the USAR Control Group (Retired).

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, 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.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___PMS__  ___REB_  ___RCH_  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.




_____Paul M. Smith______
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070002575
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
2007/08/28
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
19710629
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-100, Chapter 3, Section XI
DISCHARGE REASON
Relieved From Active Duty
BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
Ms. Mitrano
ISSUES         1.
100.0100.0000
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.