IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  13 September 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120004386 


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 her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 17 November 1984 to show:

* her rank as sergeant (SGT) at the time of separation from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR)
* she was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 95B (Military Police) and 97B (Counter Intelligence Agent)
* she completed Drill Sergeant School
* 179 days of active service with the 98th Division

2.  She states her DD Form 214 is missing:

* her correct rank of SGT at the time of her separation from the USAR
* the MOS' she was awarded during her USAR service
* two 179-day active duty tours she completed with the 98th Division

3.  She provides:

* Department of the Army Reserve Personnel (DARP) Form 249 (Chronological Statement of Retirement Points)
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* Standard Form 93 (Report of Medical History)
* Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination)
* Request for Examination

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 USAR on 11 October 1983.  Initial Active Duty for Training (IADT) Order 198-17, dated 11 October 1983, indicates she was ordered to IADT on 27 June 1984 for a period of 18 weeks.  

3.  Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center, Fort Jackson, SC, Order 187-171, dated 25 September 1984, awarded the applicant primary MOS 71L (Administrative Specialist) upon completion of the required training.

4.  She was released from IADT on 17 November 1984 and she was issued a DD Form 214 for this period which shows in:

   a.  item 4a (Grade, Rate or Rank), her rank as private (PV1).
   
   b.  item 11 (Primary Specialty Number, Title and Years and Months in Specialty (Additional specialty numbers and titles involving periods of one or more years)), she was awarded primary MOS 71L.
   
   c.  item 12c (Net Active Service This Period), she completed 4 months and 21 days (a period of 143 days) of active military service.

   d.  item 14 (Military Education), she completed 8 weeks of training as an Administrative Specialist.

5.  Orders show she was ordered to active duty for training or annual training 12 times between 14 January 1985 and 25 July 1987 while assigned to the 98th Division, but never for a period greater than 60 days.

6.  Her service record is void of evidence which indicates she served two 
179-day active duty tours with the 98th Division.
7.  Orders 43-1, dated 30 September 1985, indicate she was awarded secondary MOS 95B1O, effective 30 September 1985.  Her service record is void of evidence which indicates she served in her secondary MOS of 95B for one or more years.  

8.  Her DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) indicates she was a Drill SGT Candidate on 1 October 1986.  Her service record is void of evidence which indicates she completed Drill Sergeant School.  

9.  Her service record is void of evidence which indicates she completed training or was awarded MOS 97B.

10.  Orders 7-1, dated 29 February 1988, promoted her to the rank of SGT with an effective date and date of rank of 29 February 1988.

11.  Orders 42-6, dated 4 November 1988, reassigned her to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training), effective 4 November 1988.  These orders show her rank as SGT and she was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 98th Division, Rochester, NY.  

12.  Orders 0-04-028392, dated 4 April 1990, indicate she was discharged from the USAR, effective 10 April 1990.  These orders also show her rank as SGT.

13.  She provided the following documents which indicate(s):

	a.  Chronological Statement of Retirement Points, dated 9 March 1991, show she was:

* credited with 144 active duty points for the retirement year ending (RYE) 10 October 1984
* credited with 106 active duty points for the RYE 10 October 1985 
* credited with 24 active duty points for the RYE 10 October 1986
* credited with 23 active duty points for the RYE 10 October 1987
* serving in the rank of SGT
   
	b.  Both Standard Form 93 and Standard Form 88, dated 5 September 1989, show her pay grade as E-5.

14.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) 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.  It directed:

   a.  the rank 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.
   
   b.  the titles of all MOSs in which an individual served in for at least 1 year and the number of years and months served will be entered in item 11.  
   
   c.  formal in-service training courses of 40 hours or more successfully completed during the period of service covered by title, length in weeks, and month and year completed will be listed in item 14.  
   
   d.  DD Form 214 is issued to Reserve Component Soldiers upon completion of a minimum of 90 days of continuous active service.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends the rank of SGT is not listed on her DD Form 214 ending on 17 November 1984.  However, the evidence of record shows she was promoted to SGT on 29 February 1988.  Her discharge orders from the USAR, dated 4 April 1990 and her Chronological Statement of Retirement Points, dated 9 March 1991, confirm she was discharged in the rank of SGT.  Therefore, there is no basis for correcting her DD Form 214 ending on 17 November 1984 to show her rank as SGT.  

2.  Orders show she was awarded secondary MOS 95B1O on 30 September 1985, which was after she was issued the DD Form 214 ending on 17 November 1984.  Therefore, the available evidence is insufficient to grant this portion of her request.

3.  Her service record is also void of evidence and she has not provided any evidence which shows she was awarded MOS 97B prior to her 1984 release from active duty.  Therefore, the evidence is insufficient to correct her DD Form 214 show this MOS. 

4.  Her DA Form 2-1 shows she was a drill sergeant candidate.  However, her service record is void of evidence which shows she completed the drill sergeant school prior to her 1984 release from active duty.  Therefore, there is no basis for correcting her DD Form 214 to show this course.

5.  The evidence of record shows she was ordered to IADT on 27 June 1984 and was released from IADT on 17 November 1984, which is a period of 4 months and 21 days (143 days).  She was issued a DD Form 214 which properly covers this period of active service.  Her Chronological Statement of Retirement Points also shows she was credited with active duty points for this period.  

6.  The available evidence shows she had numerous periods of active duty for training while assigned to the 98th Division.  However, none of these periods met the minimum duration to warrant the issuance of an additional DD Form 214.  

7.  Although the applicant contends her record is missing two 179-day active duty tours with the 98th Division the available evidence does not support her claim.  In the absence of sufficient evidence to show she completed two 179-day active duty tours there is no basis for granting this portion of her request.  

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)                                         AR20120004386



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120004386



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1