RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070017956 


	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.




Director



Analyst
      The following members, a quorum, were present:




Chairperson



Member



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 DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Release From Active Duty), issued on 2 September 1988 be corrected to show his rank/grade as Specialist (SPC/E-4) and that he be issued a copy of an honorable discharge certificate that shows this change.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the new copy of the DD Form 214 he received shows his pay grade as Private (PV2/E-2) but a previous copy that he received showed that he was a SPC (E-4). 

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 dated 2 September 1988 in support of this application.

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 enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) and was assigned to the 192nd Supply Company, Houston, Texas, on 15 May 1987 for a period of 8 years.  He entered active duty for training on 12 July 1988 for the purpose of completing the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 76V (Material Storage and Handling Specialist).  The highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was Private (PV2), pay grade E-2.  

3.  Item 4a (Grade, Rate, or Rank) of the applicant’s DD Form 214, dated
2 September 1988, shows that on the date of his release from active duty for training he held the grade of PV2.  Item 4b (Pay Grade) shows that he held the pay grade of E-2 and Item 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade) shows that his date of rank was 1 January 1988.

4.  A memorandum from the 192nd Supply Company, Houston, Texas, Subject: Reduction (Causes for Reduction) dated 27 December 1988, shows that the applicant was informed that he had missed nine scheduled drills.  The memorandum also shows that Solders in the grade of E-2 who accrue nine unexcused absences from unit training assemblies during 1 year will be considered for reduction to the next lower grade for inefficiency prior to being transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR).

5.  Section IV of DA Form 4187 prepared by the 192nd Supply Company, Houston, Texas shows that the applicant was reduced from PV2 to PV1 effective 10 February 1989 and Order Number 26-12, 90th United Sates Army Reserve Command, San Antonio, Texas, dated 29 March 1989, shows that the applicant was transferred to the IRR effective the date of this Order.  

6.  Item 3 (Date of Rank) in Section II (Personnel Data) of the applicant’s DA Form 2a (USAR) shows that he was advanced to the grade of Specialist (E-4) on
21 March 1993.

7.  Army Regulation 635-5 prescribes the separation documents that are prepared for individuals upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing these separation documents.  It states, in effect, that the active duty rank at the time of separation will be entered on the separation document.

8.  Army Regulation 15-185, is the regulation that governs the operation of the Board, sets forth the procedures for processing requests to correct military records and states, in pertinent part, that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity and that the burden of proving error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence rests with the applicant.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that his DD Form 214, issued on 2 September 1988 should be corrected to show that he was a SPC/E-4 and that he should be issued a discharge certificate to show the same was found to be without merit.

2.  By regulation, the active duty/grade/rank held at the time of separation will be entered on the separation document.  Evidence of record shows the applicant was a PV2/E-2 at the time of his release from active duty on 2 September 1988 and the applicant authenticated the separation document with his signature in 
Item 21 (signature of member being separated) on the date of his separation.  In effect, his signature was his verification that the information contained on the separation document, to include the Item 4a and Item 4b entries, were correct at the time the DD Form 214 was prepared and issued.

3.  The available evidence shows the applicant was advanced to E-4 on 
21 March 1993 after he was separated from active duty in the Regular Army.  Therefore, the evidence is insufficient to support the requested relief in this case.

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.

5.  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

____X____  ___X____  __X____  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.




      ___________X____________
                CHAIRPERSON
      


ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20070017956



2


DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
1901 SOUTH BELL STREET 2ND FLOOR
ARLINGTON, VA  22202-4508