RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  25 March 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070018177 


	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. Mohammed R. Elhaj

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Shirley L. Powell

Chairperson

Ms. Yolanda Maldonado

Member

Mr. Edward E. Montgomery

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 the correct rank/grade and date of separation.

2.  The applicant states that his rank/grade and separation date are erroneously listed on his records.  Item 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and Item 5b (Pay Grade) on his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), should show "specialist five (SP5)/E-5” instead of "specialist four (Temporary) [SP4 (T)]/E-4” and Item 13d (Effective Date) should show "13 December 1968“ instead of "14 August 1968.”

3.  The applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214 and a copy of Special Orders Number 257, dated 3 December 1968, in support of his 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's records show that he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 15 August 1966 in the grade of private/E-1.  He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91B (Medical Specialist).  

3.  The applicant's records further show that he was promoted to the permanent ranks/grades of private (PV2)/E-2 on 15 December 1966 and private first class (PFC)/E-3 on 21 April 1967.




4.  Company A, 1st Battalion, Medical Field Service School, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, Unit Orders Number 120, dated 25 September 1967, show that the applicant was appointed to the “Temporary” rank/grade of SP4/E-4 on 25 September 1967, in accordance with paragraph    7-13 of Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management). 

5.  On 21 March 1968, the Chief, Instruction Support Branch, Medical Field Service School, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, requested a waiver for the applicant’s promotion to E-5, citing the applicant’s assignment as a driver for the Assistant School Commandant and his outstanding performance of his duties.

6.  On 22 March 1968, the Commandant, Medical Field Service School, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, approved the applicant’s waiver to E-5 and remarked that the applicant “may be considered for promotion with other qualified personnel of this command.”

7.  On 15 July 1968, undecided about his military career, the applicant requested an early release from active duty in the Army of the United States status for a period of 4 months and 7 days; transfer to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR); and reorder to active duty as a Reservist.  The applicant further certified that if his request was approved, he understood that he could not thereafter retract his consent for additional active duty as a reservist.  

8.  On 23 July 1968, the Commanding General, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, approved the applicant’s request for a period of four months' early release.  

9.  Headquarters, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, Special Orders Number 174, dated 31 July 1968, show that the applicant was released from active duty and transferred to the USAR effective 14 August 1968. The Orders further stated that the applicant would be ordered to active duty from USAR status on the date immediately following his release from active duty (i.e. on 15 August 1968).  Accordingly, he was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training) on 14 August 1968 as a SP4 (T)/E-4.

10.  Headquarters, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, Special Orders Number 222, dated 30 September 1968, show the applicant was appointed/promoted to the temporary grade of SP5/E-5 on 30 September 1968.  


11.  Office of the Adjutant General, U.S. Army Reserve Components Personnel and Administration Center, St. Louis, Missouri, Letter Orders Number               07-258364, dated 26 July 1972, relieved the applicant from his obligation in the Standby Reserve of the USAR Control Group and honorably discharged him effective 14 August 1972.  The standard name line on the Letter Orders listed the applicant’s grade as “SP5.”

12.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, established the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  The regulation stated, in pertinent part, that the purpose of the separation document is to provide the individual with documentary evidence of their military service.  It is important that information entered on the form should be complete and accurate.  This regulation specified that the DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty to include attendance at basic and advanced training.  It also stated, in pertinent part, that the DD Form 214 will be prepared for all personnel at the time of their retirement, discharge, or release from active duty.  The date the Soldier entered active duty status was entered in Item 10c (Date Inducted) or Item 16c (Date of Entry) and the last date of active duty was entered in Item 13d (Effective Date). 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Evidence of record shows that the applicant requested early release from active duty and transfer to the USAR.  His request was approved and he was accordingly separated on 14 August 1968.  On 15 August 1968, he was no longer on active duty; rather, he was in the USAR.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time captured his active duty service from the date of his induction (15 August 1966) to the date of his separation from active duty (14 August 1968). Therefore, the effective date of separation shown on his DD Form 214, dated 14 August 1968, is correct. 

2.  Evidence of record shows that the applicant’s appointment/promotion to the temporary grade of SP5/E-5 was effective on 30 September 1968, after the applicant was separated from active duty.  The highest rank the applicant attained during his active military service was SP4 (T)/E-4.  The DD Form 214, dated 14 August 1968, captured the applicant's highest grade held at the time of his release from active duty.  Therefore, the rank/grade shown in Items 5a and 5b of his DD Form 214, dated 14 August 1968, are correct. 



3.  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 did not submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to relief. 

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__slp___  __ym____  __eem___  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.



							Shirley L. Powell
______________________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
YYYYMMDD
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.