Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017196
Original file (20080017196.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	       29 January 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080015439 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show his rank and pay grade as specialist (SPC), E4 in item 4a (Grade, Rate, or Rank) and 4b (Pay Grade).

2.  The applicant states that blocks 4a and 4b are incorrect on his DD Form 214.  He contends that his rank and pay grade were SPC, E-4 at the time he was discharged.  He states that the last Leave and Earnings Statement (LES) he received on 30 March 1998 reflected he was a SPC, E-4.  He noticed the error when he received his DD Form 214. 

3.  The applicant provides no additional documents 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 March 1992.  At the completion of basic training and advanced individual training, he was awarded military occupational specialty 82C (Field Artillery Surveyor).  He completed a tour in Germany.  

3.  He was promoted to SPC on 3 May 1994 and sergeant on 8 September 1995.

4.  On 10 December 1997, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for violating a lawful general regulation by wrongfully transporting and possessing a firearm in his privately owned vehicle (POV).  His punishment consisted of a reduction to SPC, E-4, a forfeiture of $671.00 pay for 2 months, extra duty for 45 days, and restriction for 45 days.

5.  On an unknown date, the separation authority approved the discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c for misconduct with issuance of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted grade based on Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), paragraph 6-11 and Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), paragraph 6-15.  

6.  Headquarters, United States Infantry Center, Fort Benning, Georgia Orders 104-2245, dated 14 April 1999, show the applicant was reassigned to the 
U.S. Army transition point to be discharged on 21 April 1999.  His rank is shown as "PV1" on the standard name line of these orders.

7.  The applicant was discharged on 21 April 1999 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c by reason of misconduct with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He completed a total of 7 years, 1 month and 19 days of active military service.

8.  Item 4a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and item 4b (Pay Grade) on the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows his rank and pay grade as “PV1” and “E1.”  

9.  Army Regulation 635-5 prescribes the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement or discharge.  In pertinent part, it directed that the grade in which enlisted personnel were serving at the time of 


separation would be entered in item 4a and the pay grade will be entered in item 4b.

10.  Army Regulation 600-200, paragraph 6-11 and Army Regulation 600-8-19, paragraph 6-15, in effect at the time, stated that when the separation authority determines that a Soldier was to be discharged from the Service under other than honorable conditions, the Soldier would be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his rank and pay grade were SPC, E-4 at the time he was discharged.

2.  The applicant was promoted to sergeant on 8 September 1995.  He was reduced from sergeant to SPC on 10 December 1997 as a result of nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ.

3.  The applicant was separated on 21 April 1999 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c.  The separation authority determined that the applicant would be issued an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  As a result, he was reduced from SPC to the lowest enlisted grade of private, E-1.  

4.  Based on Army Regulation 635-5, the DD Form 214 is meant to reflect the applicant's status as of his last day of active duty on 21 April 1999.  As of that date, he was a private, E-1.  Therefore, his DD Form 214 accurately reflects his rank and pay grade as private, E-1.

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.




      _______ _ xxx  _______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080015439





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080015439



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012830

    Original file (20110012830.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 February 2007, the separation authority approved his discharge action under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, with the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. His re-issued DD Form 214 shows he was discharged by reason of misconduct (drug abuse) in the rank/grade of PV1/E-1 on 2 March 2007 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, with a character of service of under honorable conditions (general). The evidence of record also...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110019880

    Original file (20110019880.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 26 April 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110019880 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. He states his DD Form 214 is in error because item 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade) shows the correct date he was promoted to SPC/E-4. Accordingly, he was retired on 10 April 2009 in the grade of PVT/E-1 (item 12h incorrectly shows the effective date of pay grade as 1 July 2008).

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005124

    Original file (20070005124.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    It states that when a Soldier is to be discharged under other than honorable conditions, the separation authority will direct an immediate reduction to the lowest enlisted grade (per Army Regulation 600-8-19, chapter 7). The evidence clearly shows that the applicant was advanced to pay grade E-4, effective 1 October 2003. The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), for misconduct.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016990

    Original file (20090016990.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 1 March 1988 the applicant was notified by his unit commander that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12c, with an honorable discharge. On 6 April 1988 the separation authority approved the separation action and directed that he receive an honorable discharge. Therefore, his records should not be corrected to show his rank/pay grade as SPC/E-4.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018285

    Original file (20080018285.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his reduction to the rank of private (PV1)/pay grade E-1, be set aside; that he be restored to the rank of specialist (SPC)/pay grade E-4; and correction to Items 4a (Grade, Rate or Rank), 4b (Pay Grade), and 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). The applicant was discharged on 23 December 2003, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014292

    Original file (20080014292.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Item 26 (Separation Code) of his DD Form 214 shows "KFS” and Item 27 shows "RE-4." An RE code of "4" was entered to his DD Form 214. The evidence of record also shows the applicant completed an honorable period of service from 10 July 1996 to 25 January 1999.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100017231

    Original file (20100017231.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was reduced from the rank of SPC to the rank of PV2 on 22 March 2007.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003170

    Original file (20090003170.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of the following items on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 23 December 1992: * Item 23 (Type of Separation) to change her type of separation from discharge to release from active duty; * Item 24 (Character of Service) to upgrade her character of service from under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) to honorable; * Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) to change her character of service from...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001660

    Original file (20090001660.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He claims he served his final 18 months as a PV1 without getting into any trouble, and he was told by his first sergeant (1SG) that his rank would show up in his pay (twice); however, it never did. Item 21 (Time Lost) of the applicant's DA Form 2-1 shows he accrued a total of 33 days of time lost due to two separate periods of AWOL (18 November through 2 December 1979 and 2 through 13 October 1980. It further shows that he was reduced to PV1/E-1 as a result of a court-martial conviction on...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020977

    Original file (20090020977.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 26 December 2002 to show: * completion of first full term of service * rank/grade of specialist (SPC)/E-4 instead of private (PV1)/E-1 * reentry eligibility (RE) code of 1 instead RE code 3 2. There is no evidence in the applicant's record that shows he was advanced to the rank/grade of SPC/E-4 during his period of service. The applicant contends that his...