RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  03 April 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070006145 


	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

Ms. Judy Blanchard

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Carmen Duncan

Chairperson

Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas

Member

Mr. Jeffrey C. Redmann

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 pay grade be changed from Sergeant First Class (SFC) to Master sergeant (MSG) pay grade E-8.  He also requests that his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) also show the Army Achievement Medal.

2.  The applicant states in effect, that item 4a on his DD Form 214 should read (MSG) and item 4b on his DD Form 214 should read E-8.  Orders 092-0006 dated 2 April 1997, shows that he retired as a MSG pay grade E-8.      

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, a copy of Orders 
092-0006 and a copy of DA Form 638-1 (Recommendation for Award of Army Achievement Medal, Army Commendation Medal and Meritorious Medal). 

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 record shows that he initially enlisted in the Pennsylvania Army National Guard on 16 April 1972, with over 6 years of prior active and inactive service in the United States Marines.  His service was continuous through enlistment and reenlistments.

3.  On 16 April 1981, the applicant was promoted to MSG/E-8 while serving on active duty in an Active Guard Reserve (AGR) status performing Full-Time National Guard Duty (FTNGD) in Williamstown, Pennsylvania.  

4.  On 1 April 1994, the applicant was awarded the Army Achievement Medal (AAM) for exceptionally meritorious achievement as a Team Captain for the 131st Transportation Company Combat Pistol Team, during the period of October 1992 to 30 September 1993.  However, this medal is not found on his discharge document.

5.  On 2 April 1997, the Department of the Army Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison Fort George Meade, Maryland, published Orders Number 092-0006.  These orders directed that the applicant be released from active duty and on the date following, placed on the retired list, effective date of this action 30 June 1997.  His retired rank was Master Sergeant (MSG).

6.  The applicant's record shows that on 30 June 1997, the applicant was released from active duty for the purpose of retirement.  The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he completed a total of 31 years, 2 months, and 15 days of service for basic pay.  Item 4a (Grade or rank) shows he held the rank of sergeant First Class (SFC).  

7.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Personnel Division, National Guard Bureau.  The advisory opinion recommends approval of the applicant’s request.  Orders Number 092-0006, dated 2 April 1997, shows that while the applicant was released from active duty as a Sergeant First Class, he was placed on the retired list as a Master Sergeant, effective 30 June 1997, (the same as his separation date on his DD Form 214), in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200.  This was because master sergeant was the highest grade he satisfactorily held and he was reduced in grade not as a result of misconduct.  The certificate awarding him the AAM is provided, IAW AR 600-8-22.  Therefore, it was recommended that the applicant’s DD Form 214 be corrected by showing he was discharged/retired as a master sergeant/E-8 and by showing he was awarded the AAM.  

8.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 12-3b (1)  states, in pertinent part, that retirement for length of service, the Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS), Soldiers serving on active duty at the time of retirement, under paragraph 12-4, in a grade lower than their highest active duty enlisted grade, who were administratively reduced not as a result of their own misconduct, will retire at the highest enlisted grade in which they served satisfactorily on active duty.  

9.  AR 600-8-22, paragraph 3-18b, the AAM is awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who distinguished themselves by meritorious service or achievement of a lesser degree than required for award of the Army Commendation Medal.  

10.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separations Documents) prescribes the preparation guidelines for the DD Form 214.  It states, in pertinent part, that Item 4a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and Item 4b (Pay Grade) will reflect the active duty grade or rank and pay grade (respectively) at time of separation.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that his DD Form 214 be corrected to show pay grade E-8 and to add the AAM to his DD Form 214 were carefully considered and found to have partial merit.  

2.  By regulation, the rank and pay grade held on the date of separation from active duty will be entered in Item 4a and Item 4b of the DD Form 214.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant held the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class, pay grade E-7 on the date he retired from active duty.  Thus, there is no error with respect to the entries in Item 4a and Item 4b of his DD Form 214.  

3.  The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was awarded the AAM for exceptionally meritorious achievement from 1 October 1992 to 30 September 1993; therefore, this award should be reflected on his DD Form 214.  

4.  In view of the facts of this case, the applicant’s DD Form 214 should be corrected by showing that he was awarded the AAM.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

__CD __  __LMD__  __JCR___   GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by adding the entry “Army Achievement Medal" to Item 13; and issuing him a corrected separation document that reflect these changes.
2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to correction of the DD Form 214 to show rank and pay grade as Master Sergeant, E-8.








___Carmen Duncan  ___
      CHAIRPERSON