IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 4 January 2011
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100016764
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 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) to show his grade as a specialist five (SP5)/E-5 instead of specialist second class (SP2).
2. The applicant states his DD Form 214 listed the wrong rank at discharge.
3. The applicant provides a DD Form 214 and an Honorable Discharge Certificate.
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 applicants 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 applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicants military records are not available to the Board for review. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973. It is believed that the applicants records were lost or destroyed in that fire. However, there were sufficient documents remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.
3. The applicants DD Form 214 shows he enlisted in the Regular Army in the rank of private/E-1 for a period of 3 years on 29 August 1952. This form also shows at the time of his separation he held military occupational specialty 131.10 (Armor Crewman) and his most significant duty assignment was Company A, 41st Tank Battalion, Fort Carson, CO. He completed 3 years and 1 day of active service.
4. His reconstructed records contain Special Orders Number 201, issued by Headquarters, Fort Carson, CO, on 26 August 1955, discharging him from active duty and transferring him to the U.S. Army Reserve, effective 29 August 1955 for completion of his Reserve obligation. The orders listed his rank as a SP-2.
5. He was honorably separated at Fort Carson, CO, on 29 August 1955 and he was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group to complete his remaining service obligation.
6. Item 3 (Grade, Rate, Rank, and Date of Appointment) of his DD Form 214 shows the entry, "SP-2 (T) (Temporary) 12 May 1955." Additionally, item 18 (Remarks) shows the highest permanent rank/grade he held as PV2.
7. He submitted a copy of his Honorable Discharge Certificate, dated 28 August 1960, showing his rank as a SP5/E-5.
8. The Enlisted Grade Structure in the Army has changed several times since 1942. Prior to 1 September 1942, the Army followed the following enlisted grade structure:
* Grade 1 Master Sergeant (M/Sgt)
* Grade 2 Technical Sergeant and First Sergeant (T/Sgt & 1st Sgt)
* Grade 3 Staff Sergeant and Technician 3rd Grade (S/Sgt & Tec 3rd Gr)
* Grade 4 Sergeant and Technician 4th Grade (Sgt & 4th Gr)
* Grade 5 Corporal and Technician 5th Grade (Cpl & Tech 5th Gr)
* Grade 6 Private First Class (Pvt 1st Class)
* Grade 7 Private (Pvt)
9. There were other changes on 1 August 1948 and on 1 October 1949. Additionally, during the period 21 January 1951 through 30 June 1955, the Army followed the following enlisted grade structure:
* Grade 7 Master Sergeant (M/Sgt)
* Grade 6 Sergeant First Class (SFC)
* Grade 5 Sergeant (Sgt)
* Grade 4 Corporal (Cpl)
* Grade 3 Private First Class (Pvt 1st Class)
* Grade 2 private (Pv2) E-2
* Grade 1 Private (Pvt) E-1
10. During the period 1 July 1955 through 31 May 1958, the Army changed the enlisted grade structure as follows:
* Pay Grade E-7 Master Sergeant (M/Sgt) & Master Specialist (MSP)
* Pay Grade E-6 Sergeant First Class (SFC) & Specialist First (SP1) Class
* Pay Grade E-5 Sergeant (Sgt) and Specialist Second (SP2) Class
* Pay Grade E-4 Corporal (Cpl) and Specialist Third (SP3) Class
* Pay Grade E-3 Private First Class (Pvt 1st Class)
* Pay Grade E-2 Private (Pvt) E-2
* Pay Grade E-1 Private (Pvt) E-1
11. On 1 June 1958, the Army changed the enlisted rank structure to:
* E-9 Sergeant Major (Specialist Nine)
* E-8 First/Master Sergeant (Specialist Eight
* E-7 Sergeant First Class/Platoon Sgt (Specialist Seven)
* E-6 Staff Sergeant (Specialist Six)
* E-5 Sergeant (Specialist Five)
* E-4 Corporal or Specialist Four
* E-3 Private First Class
* E-2 Private
* E-1 Private or Recruit
12. War Department Technical Manual 12-236 (Preparation of Separation Forms) and Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribed the policies and procedures for the preparation of separation forms. These regulations state, in pertinent part, that the purpose of the separation document
is to provide the veteran with a separation certificate and a military or enlisted record and report of separation. The DD Form 214 is prepared for all enlisted personnel separated from the service due to discharge, release from active duty or transfer to a Reserve Component, or retired. Item 3 of the DD Form 214 shows the grade held at the time of separation.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show the correct rank.
2. The evidence of record shows the applicant served on active duty from 29 August 1952 through 29 August 1955. The grade he attained during his military service was pay grade E-5. His active military service fell between 1 July 1955 and 31 May 1958. The corresponding rank associated with this grade during his period of military service was "SP2," which is properly annotated in item 3 of his DD Form 214. The rank "SP5" did not exist during his active duty military service.
3. The Army enlisted grade structure was changed on 1 June 1958. He was honorably discharged from the USAR on 28 August 1960. His pay grade did not change; however, the Army renamed the ranks associated with each grade. During this period, the corresponding rank associated with pay grade E-5 was "SP5," which is correctly shown on his Honorable Discharge Certificate. This structure change did not impact the applicant's pay grade as he was not on active duty at the time of this change.
4. For historical purposes, the Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records. The data and information contained in those records should reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created. In the absence of a sufficiently compelling reason, there is no reason to compromise the integrity of the Armys records at this late date.
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
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) AR20100016764
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100016764
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009457
The applicant provides: * DD Form 214, ending on 27 January 1958 * Special Orders (SO) Number 5, dated 8 January 1958 * Discharge from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Letter Orders S01-2554, dated 28 December 1962 * Honorable Discharge Certificate, dated 31 December 1962 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Item 3 of the DD Form 214 shows the grade and date of rank of the grade held at the time of separation. ____________x_____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005575
The applicant's complete military records are not available to the Board for review. Item 3 of the DD Form 214 shows the grade and date of rank of the grade held at the time of separation. The evidence of record shows the applicant served on active duty from 4 October 1954 to 24 September 1957.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009876
The applicant's complete military records are not available to the Board for review. Item 3 of the DD Form 214 shows the grade and date of rank of the grade held at the time of separation. _____________x____________ 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000345C070206
The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review. Item 3 (Grade) shows he held the rank of SP2 (T) on the date of his separation. The evidence of record confirms the applicant held the pay grade E-5 and corresponding rank of SP2 at the time of his separation from active duty.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014974
The applicant, the widow of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests correction of her husband's WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation - Honorable Discharge) to show his rank as a Sergeant First Class (SFC) instead of a Technical Sergeant (T/Sgt). The evidence of record shows the FSM served on active duty from 20 January 1944 through 5 June 1946. The rank "SFC" did not exist during his military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20120004185
The applicant requests correction of his WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation - Honorable Discharge) to show his rank as a Technician Fourth Grade (T-4) instead of corporal (Cpl). The applicant's military records are not available to the Board for review. The Enlisted Grade Structure in the Army has changed several times since 1942.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130017114
The applicant provides his Honorable Discharge Certificate and DD Form 214. 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. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains correcting...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016291
This form also shows his rank as Specialist 2 (T) [temporary] with a date of rank of 19 December 1955. A copy of a noncommissioned officer (NCO)/specialist program appointment letter, dated 13 March 1957, states the applicant's personnel records indicated he converted to a specialist status on or about 1 July 1955; however, there was no record of his acceptance or declination of the rank designation. The applicant also states that he does not know what rank a SP5 is.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003551
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Item 3 of the DD Form 214 shows the grade held at the time of separation. The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show his grade as that of S/Sgt.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009716
The applicant requests that his rank on his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show he was a SPEC 5. 2. 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 applicants failure to timely file. His...