IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 20 December 2011
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110013450
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 item 21 (Grade, Rate, or Rank at Time of Entry into Current Active Service) of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the Unites States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show Sergeant First Class (SFC), E-6.
2. The applicant states the orders directing him to report for active duty show his rank and grade as SFC/E-6, not Staff Sergeant (SSG) E-6 as shown on his DD Form 214. He also states a new service record was prepared at Fort Bragg, NC, dated 2 January 1962.
3. The applicant provides:
* active duty orders
* release from active duty orders with list of unit personnel
* DA Form 24 (Service Record)
* DD Form 214
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 was inducted into the Army of the United States on
28 October 1955. He served at Fort Meade MD, and Fort Devens, MA, until he was released from active duty on 25 October 1957 as a Specialist 3 E-4. He remained in the U.S. Army Reserve.
3. The applicant provides:
a. 29 September 1961 Letter Orders 285, Headquarters, II U.S. Army Corps, Camp Kilmer, NJ, ordered him to active duty on 2 October 1961, as an SFC/E-6. The unit listed on the orders is Headquarters and Headquarters Detachment, 310th Military Police Battalion.
b. 20 June 1962 Letter Orders 984, XVIII Airborne Corps and Fort Bragg, that announced the release from active duty of personnel listed as assigned to Company C, 310th Military Police Battalion. The applicant's name is on the list with a release date of 4 August 1962. His grade and rank are shown as
SSG/E-6.
4. His DA Form 24 shows in Section I (Appointment, Promotions, or Reductions) that he was promoted to SSG E-6 (P) on 18 January 1961, and he was serving in that grade on 2 October 1961 when he entered active duty.
5. He was honorably released from active duty on 4 August 1962. Item 3a (Grade, Rate or Rank) of his DD Form 214 shows his rank/grade as "SSG E-6 (P)."
6. His records contain a DD Form 220 (Active Duty Report) dated 2 October 1961. Item 3 (Grade) shows SSG.
7. Prior to 1 June 1958, one of the titles for E-6s was SFC. Effective on 1 June 1958, the title SFC referred to E-7s exclusively.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The orders directing the applicant to report for active duty show his rank and grade as SFC E-6. There is no available evidence that the applicant served as a sergeant first class, either as an E-6 or as an E-7. Since the ranks had been restructured on 1 June 1958, it appears the proper grade and rank on those orders should have shown his rank and grade as SSG E-6. It appears the orders erroneously show his rank and grade as SFC E-6.
2. Those orders are insufficient to justify changing the grade and rank on his DD Form 214 effective 4 August 1962.
3. In view of the above, the applicants request should be denied.
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 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) AR20100025549
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110013450
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006291
He states the following new facts are not reflected in his Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceeding nor are they reflected in his military records (DA Form 24 (Service Record) and DD Form 214): a. He provides his DA Form 24, prepared on 22 January 1962, for the period 28 October 1955 to 26 October 1957; and his DA Form 20. His record contains: * DA Form 24 for the period 28 October 1955 to 25 October 1957 which shows he was promoted to SP3 (T) on 24 May...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000031
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The FSM's military personnel record contains an AGPZ Form 27 (Statement of Service Enlisted Personnel - Retirement), dated 6 June 1960, which was completed for the FSM during his retirement processing. He held the rank of SFC and pay grade E-6 on the date of his REFRAD for the purpose of retirement, 31 May 1961, and he was appropriately placed on the Retired List in that rank and pay grade on 1 June 1961.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066562C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The FSM’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains an Application for Retirement (DA Form 2339), dated 9 January 1961, which confirms that he requested voluntary retirement, in the rank of SFC and pay grade of E-6, on 31 March 1961. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that the FSM’s record should be corrected to reflect the pay grade E-7 corresponding to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005285
An AGUZ Form 658 (Determination of Grade for Retirement, Advancement, Separation or Retirement Pay), dated 14 May 1974, shows the FSM was promoted to MSGT (E-7) on 24 January 1953 and reduced to SFC (E-6) on 16 December 1957 (per orders). Records show the FSM held the grade of E-6 when he was retired from active duty on 31 May 1964 and he was placed on the Retired List in that grade. Records show the FSM was advanced on the Retired List to the grade of SFC (E-7), effective 16 May 1974,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150000041
The applicant requests correction of his records as follows: * issue a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) showing he retired in the rank/grade of sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 vice staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 on 30 April 1972 * back pay of the difference in pay between SFC/E-7 and SSG/E-6 * return of his seized property used in his court-martial 2. The applicant states: * the Army should have corrected all his personnel records and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012403
The applicant states, in effect, that although the FSM retired at the rank/grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6, he previously held the rank of SFC for approximately 3 to 4 years. The applicant requests correction of the FSM's DD Form 214 to show he was retired in the rank/grade of SFC/E-7, the highest rank/grade held on active duty. Army Regulation 15-80 provides that service in a higher grade will normally be considered unsatisfactory if reversion to the lower grade is the result of a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080000537
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 September 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080000537 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant, the daughter of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests that her father's records be corrected to show, in effect, that he retired in the rank of sergeant first class (SFC), pay grade E-7. The FSM's record shows he entered into the USAR on 5 February 1957 and was discharged on 24 July 1963, in the rank of staff sergeant (SSG)/pay grade E-6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017739
Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20090008476, dated 17 September 2009. He was denied the second award of the Army Good Conduct Medal due to the 25 September 1959 summary court-martial. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. awarding...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070007203
The applicant's records show his rank, date of rank, and grade history as follows: a. Corporal (CPL), permanent grade (P), pay grade E-4 with a date of rank of 31 August 1950, in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army Enlistment Program); b. On 23 October 1967, the applicant signed a statement declining his recommendation for promotion to pay grade E-7 under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-200 and stated that he was retiring and did not wish to have a two-year service...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008424C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, that the retired pay grade of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to E-7. Therefore, there is no error or injustice related to the FSM’s retired grade of SFC/E-6 and no basis to changing it at this time. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 31 August 1964, the date of the FSM’s separation for retirement.