BOARD DATE: 10 January 2013
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120011328
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 (Armed Forces of the Unites States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show his pay grade as sergeant (SGT)/E-5, not specialist (SPC)/E-4 as listed.
2. He states he was promoted to E-5 on 8 April 1995 and held it until he was separated from the Army National Guard.
3. The applicant provides:
* National Personnel Records Center letter
* DD Form 214 ending 15 October 1989
* DD Form 214 ending 3 December 1993
* U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) discharge orders dated 1 June 1994
* National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service)
* Retirement Points Accounting System Summary Points Inquiry/Update
* DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record)
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. Following prior service in the Regular Army the applicant enlisted in the Minnesota Army National Guard (MNARNG) and entered into active duty for training on 16 July 1993.
3. His DD Form 214 shows he was honorably released from active duty training effective 3 December 1993, in the rank and pay grade of SPC/E-4. He had completed 4 months and 18 days of active service during the period covered by the DD Form 214.
4. In support of his request he provided:
a. Orders D-06-419795, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, St Louis, Missouri, dated 1 June 1994, showing he was discharged from the USAR effective 1 June 2004. His grade is shown as SPC.
b. NGB Form 22, effective 1 November 1999, showing his rank and pay grade as SGT/E-5. His date of rank is listed as 8 April 1995.
c. DA Form 2-1 showing he was promoted to SGT in the MNARNG effective 8 April 1995.
5. His records contain Orders 17-1, Headquarters, 434th Main Support Battalion, Little Falls, Minnesota, dated 8 April 1995, showing he was promoted to SGT/E-5 effective 8 April 1995.
6. There is no available evidence to show he was promoted to SGT/E-5 prior to his release from active duty training.
7. 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. For items 4a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and 4b (Pay Grade), enter the rank and pay grade in which serving at the time of separation (emphasis added).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The available evidence shows the applicant was promoted to SGT/E-5 effective 8 April 1995, after his 3 December 1993 release from active duty training.
2. There is no available evidence he was promoted to E-5 prior to his release from active duty training.
3. Therefore, there is no basis for correction of the applicant's DD Form 214.
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) AR20120011328
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014443
There is no indication or evidence in the applicant's records that she was enrolled in or completed Phase II of MOS 54B BNCOC as stipulated in her promotion orders. The evidence of record further shows the applicant was conditionally promoted to SSG/E-6 on 30 June 1998 in MOS 54B contingent upon her successful completion of BNCOC. With respect to the applicant's contention that she should be considered for promotion to SFC/E-7, there is no evidence that the applicant met grade and/or NCOES...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100022246
The applicant provides: * a 30 July 2010 letter from the Defense Finance and Accounting Service * a 4 March 2010 letter from the Minnesota Army National Guard (MNARNG) * Certificate of Honorable Discharge from the MNARNG, dated 11 April 1990 * National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) for the period 12 April 1984-14 September 1990 * NGB Form 22A (Correction to NGB Form 22), dated 11 February 2010 * DA Form 3686 (Joint Uniform Military Pay System-Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002753
The applicant requests correction of his records to show award of the National Defense Service Medal and the Army Commendation Medal; any other awards, decorations, and campaign ribbons he may have earned; and promotion to the next higher grade. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military awards) provides for award of the National Defense Service Medal. With respect to award of the National Defense Service Medal, the evidence of record shows that the applicant was ordered to ADT and entered active...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009058
The applicant states the reduction order is in error because she should not have been reduced to SPC in accordance with Army Regulation 140-158 (Army Reserve Enlisted Personnel Classification, Promotion, and Reduction), paragraph 7-12d (Failure to meet conditional promotion Noncommissioned Officer Education System (NCOES) requirements). Evidence shows her correct SSN is xxx-xx-3xxx. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017163C070206
Item 4a (Grade, Rate, or Rank) on his DD Form 214 shows his rank as “SPC” and item 4b (Pay Grade) shows his pay grade as “E4.” His date of rank is shown as 19 January 1993. There is no evidence of record which shows he was reduced to SPC, E-4 prior to his release from active duty on 29 March 2005. However, his DD Form 214 for the period ending 29 March 2005 shows he was released from active duty in the rank of SPC, E-4 with a date of rank of 19 January 1993.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711530
He then served with the U. S. Army Reserve and the Minnesota Army National Guard (MNARNG) and entered active duty with the MNARNG on 1 December 1977, as an Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) recruiter until his retirement. On 1 October 1993, he requested IG action on one of those concerns. On 11 August 1994, the applicant filed a complaint with the NGB IG Office outlining the above concerns, plus stating that the other E-9 who was considered by the STCB was given another, created-just-for-him,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110024066
The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show: * Two awards of the National Defense Service Medal for his service in Haiti * Two awards of the Overseas Service Ribbon for his service in Haiti * Meritorious Unit Commendation * Shoulder sleeve insignia * All other awards and/or medals that he is entitled to * His rank/grade as corporal (CPL)/E-4 vice specialist (SPC)/E-4 * His foreign service time in Haiti 2. Therefore, it...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006985
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 6 March 2012, he rebutted the recommendation for separation by stating he had met all the requirements of the last chance agreement and individually addressed the developmental counseling statements given to him by SFC HN. A memorandum addressed to the Minnesota National Guard IG, dated 7 March 2013, shows he requested reinstatement in the AGR program.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015492
She could not pass the APFT and never had. In order to be eligible for promotion to SGT, a Soldier must have a passing APFT score among other requirements and any previously-initiated flag must have been lifted from his or her record. ____________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 | CY2013 | 20130022000
The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show two awards of the Army Good Conduct Medal. His DD Form 214 for this period also shows his rank/grade as SPC/E-4 and his effective date of pay grade as 31 January 1991. There is no evidence in the applicant's records and he provides none to show he was ever recommended for or held the rank/grade of SGT/E-5 or CPL.