IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 17 July 2012
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120001817
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 her rank and pay grade at discharge be shown as private two (PV2), E-2 and the entry of a second period of absence without leave (AWOL) be deleted from her DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty).
2. The applicant states she was an E-2 upon discharge and she was AWOL only once.
3. The applicant provides copies of her DD Form 214, her unit commander's discharge recommendation, three pages of her DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record - Part II), and a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ).
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 applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 31 May 1975, completed training, and was awarded military occupational specialty 43M (Fabric Repairman).
3. On 31 September 1976, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for 56 days of AWOL (7 June 1976 - 1 August 1976). Her punishment included reduction to PV1, E-1.
4. The administrative documents prepared following her reduction show her as both a PV2 and a PV1 in an intermixed manner. The available record does not contain any orders or other administrative documents showing she was advanced to E-2 following her 1976 reduction.
5. Her unit commander's discharge recommendation memorandum shows her as a "PV2" and the battalion commander's recommendation shows her as a "Private."
6. The applicant was discharged on 3 February 1972. Her DD Form 214 shows she was separated in the rank and pay grade of PV1, E-1 and had two periods of lost time totaling 77 days.
7. The copy of the DA Form 2-1 provided by the applicant does not include page 2. This page includes the entries for periods of lost time and for promotions and reductions. The file copy of the DA Form 2-1 shows:
a. advancement to PV2, E-2, effective 26 November 1975; and reduction to PV1, E-1, effective 3 September 1976;
b. two periods of AWOL: 7 June 1976 through 1 August 1976, marked as dropped from the rolls (DFR), and 6 January 1977 through 23 January 1977, marked as AWOL.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant was reduced to E-1 effective 26 November 1975. The record does not contain and the applicant has not provided any documentation to show she was advanced to E-2 a second time.
2. The fact that her administrative records are inconsistent as to her rank does not validate her contention that she was advanced to E-2 a second time and held that rank at the time of her separation.
3. The DA Form 2-1 clearly shows the applicant was AWOL twice. She provides no evidence to show her DA Form 2-1 was incorrect.
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) AR20120001817
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120001817
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015624
Item 18 (Appointments and Reductions) of the applicants DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record), dated 18 October 1974 (prepared), shows the applicants promotions and reductions. The active duty grade or rank and pay grade at the time of separation is entered in Item 6a and the effective date of promotion to the current pay grade (from the most recent promotion or reduction order) is entered in Item 6b. There is no evidence in the available records and the applicant did not provide...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080013457
There is no indication in the applicants records that he was advanced beyond the rank/grade of PV2/E-2 during his active military service. Item 18 (Appointments and Reductions) of the applicants DA Form 2-1 shows the applicants ranks and dates of rank as follows: PVT/E-1, 9 May 1977; PV2/E-2, 10 November 1977; PVT/E-1, 7 March 1978; PV2/E-2, 1 March 1979; PVT/E-1, 28 September 1979; and PV2/E-2, 17 March 1980. Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show he completed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070002873C071029
The resulting approved sentence was a BCD. Given his undistinguished record of service and the severity of the offenses for which he was convicted, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support clemency in this case. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of limitations prescribed by law.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040003414C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, that her general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD); that her rank be changed from private/E-1 (PV1) to private/E-2 (PV2) and that the Separation Program Number (SPN) 264 be deleted from her separation document (DD Form 214). The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to the applicant confirms that she was separated with a GD on 7 October 1970. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Codes), in effect at...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090287C070212
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The applicant's DD Form 214 shows in item 9c (Authority and Reason) that the applicant was separated under Chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200, Discharge for the Good of the Service. On 2 February 1988, the applicant submitted an application to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) requesting an upgrade of her undesirable discharge to a general discharge under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005689
He contends the date that he had a grand mal seizure is incorrectly recorded in his medical records as 3 June 1977 when it actually occurred on 7 July 1975, neither his seizures nor the replacement of the tip of his middle finger on his right hand were introduced as evidence in his court-martial or discharge proceedings, he did not have a defined chain of command, and he was not provided with legal counsel or afforded the opportunity to see a chaplain. However, there is no evidence of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013581
The evidence of record shows the applicant was promoted to SP4/E-4 on 16 November 1978. There is no evidence in her records and she provides none to show she was promoted back to SP4/E-4 between the date she was reduced (23 April 1980) and the date she was discharged (28 April 1980). _______ _ 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 | CY2006 | 20060014011C071029
Rose M. Lys | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Although the separation authority could grant an honorable or general discharge if warranted by the members record of service, an UOTHC discharge was normally considered appropriate for member separating under these provisions. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013484
On 15 March 1977, his immediate commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)). On 6 April 1977, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The evidence of record shows the applicant demonstrated he could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel because of his inability to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013459
The applicant requests the following corrections be made to his military records: a. restoration to the rank and pay grade of private (PV2)/E-2 from the period 1 September 1978 to 21 September 1979, b. refund of all pay forfeited as a result of his sentencing and reduction in grade, c. promotion consideration to the grade of private first class (PFC)/E-3, d. promotion consideration to the grade of specialist (SPC)/E-4 prior to his separation on 21 September 1979, and e. payment of all due...