Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018706
Original file (20130018706.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

	
		BOARD DATE:	 1 July 2014 

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130018706 


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 United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show his rank/grade as private first class (PFC)/E-3 vice private (PV2)/E-2. 

2.  The applicant states his rank at discharge should show PFC.

3.  The applicant provides a letter from the Office of the Adjutant General, dated 19 June 1972.

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 in the rank/grade of private PVT//E-1 on 14 January 1971.  He held military occupational specialty 95B (Military Policeman). 

3.   On 15 August 1971, while assigned or attached to the Medical Holding Company (MHC), Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC), he underwent a medical evaluation board (MEB) that referred him to a physical evaluation board (PEB).  His MEB Proceedings listed his rank as PV2.

4.  On 26 November 1971, the PEB rated his medical condition (neurological) at a 30 percent disability rating and recommended his placement on the temporary disability retired list (TDRL).  He concurred.  His PEB Proceedings listed his rank as PV2. 

5.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows:

* he was advanced to PV2/E-2 on 14 June 1971
* he was advanced to PFC/E-3 on 7 December 1971, by authority of Special Orders Number 18, issued by the MHC, WRAMC

6.  On 16 December 1971, by Order of the Secretary of the Army, the Adjutant General published Letter Orders Number D12-625 placing him on the TDRL in the rank of PV2, effective 31 December 1971.

7.  He retired on 30 December 1971 and he was placed on the TDRL on 31 December 1971.  His DD Form 214 shows he retired by reason of disability.  He completed 11 months and 17 days of active service during this period.  His DD Form 214 also shows in:

* items 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and 5b (Pay Grade) the entries PV2 and E-2
* item 6 (Date of Rank) the entry 15 June 1971

8.  On 19 June 1972, the Adjutant General published Letter Orders Number
D6-1141 amending Letter Orders Number D12-625, dated 16 December 1971, pertaining to the applicant's retirement to show his rank as PFC vice PV2.

9.  On 3 April 1973, Office of the Adjutant General, Disability Section and Branch published Letter Orders Number D4-94 removing him from the TDRL on 30 April 1973 and permanently retiring him in the rank of PFC, by reason of permanent disability.

10.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  Chapter 2, in effect at the time, stated that items 5a and 5b would show the active duty rank/pay grade and date of rank at the time of the Soldier's separation.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant underwent disability processing at the MHC, WRAMC in the rank/grade of PV2/E-2.  By the time he had been advanced to PFC/E-3 on 7 December 1971, the PEB had completed the adjudication of his case in the rank of PV2.  As such his DD Form 214 reflected the rank/grade of PV2/E-2.

2.  Although the Adjutant General took corrective action in that he issued amendment orders to reflect his retired grade as PFC, his DD Form 214 was never corrected.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 to show his rank and grade and date of rank as PFC, E-3, and 7 December 1971 respectively.

BOARD VOTE:

___X_____  __X______  _X____  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

* deleting from items 5a and 5b of his DD Form 214 the entries "PV2" and "E-2" and replacing them with the entries "PFC" and "E-3," respectively






* deleting from item 6 of his DD Form 214 the entry "6 June 1971" and replacing it with the entry "7 December 1971" 



      _________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)                                         AR20130018706





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130018706



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013401

    Original file (20090013401.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicable regulation, in effect at the time, provided that the DD Form 214 would show the Soldier's rank and pay grade as they were at the time of separation. There is no evidence in the applicant‘s records and the applicant did not provide any substantiating evidence that shows he was advanced to SPC/E-4 prior to his temporary disability retirement. Since advancement/promotion of enlisted personnel were announced in DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action) in effect at the time, in the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009492

    Original file (20100009492.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides the following documents: * a copy of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 26 February 1968 * a copy of Special Orders Number 13, dated 16 January 1968 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. (2) If the grade at the time of separation is not permanent, the permanent grade, date of appointment, and date of rank, if different from date of appointment will be entered in item 30. c. Item 30 is used to complete entries too long for their respective blocks and/or as a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003704

    Original file (20150003704.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    It also shows in: * Items 5a and 5b - PFC(P) and E-3 respectively * Item 6 (Date of Rank) - 21 September 1967 * Item 24 - the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, Vietnam Campaign Medal, and Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar * Item 30 (Remarks) - continuation of item 5a, PFC/E-3 (Permanent), date of appointment and date of rank 21 September 1967 15. After he was wounded, the applicant was reassigned from Vietnam in the rank/grade of PFC/E-3,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012600

    Original file (20140012600.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Letter Orders Number D-5-967, issued by Office of the Adjutant General on 27 May 1971, ordered his retirement in the rank/grade of SGT/E-5 and placement on the TDRL with a combined rating of 90 percent, effective 7 June 1971. Medical facility commanders may consider patients for promotion under the normal promotion criteria of this chapter, together with the following guidance: (1) Individuals with recommended-list status for promotion to pay grade E-5 or E-6 resulting from selection by a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029248

    Original file (20100029248.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) to show he held the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/pay grade E-5 instead of specialist four (SP4)/pay grade E-4 at the time of release from active duty. The applicant states, in effect, he appeared before a board to be considered for promotion to SGT/E-5 and it was granted; however, his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged in the rank/grade of SP4/E-4. His record contains no evidence and he has failed...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120019408

    Original file (20120019408.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's record is void of any evidence showing he was ever promoted to the rank/grade of SP4/E-4 at any time during his service. _______ _ _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) AR20120019408 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014160

    Original file (20090014160.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    This document also shows the applicant's rank was SP4. The applicant contends, in effect, that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show he was REFRAD in the rank of SP4/E-4 with a DOR of 9 July 1972 because he held that rank when he was separated from active duty and also at the time he was discharged from the USAR. Therefore, it would be appropriate to correct his DD Form 214 to show the correct rank, grade, and DOR.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002820

    Original file (20110002820.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also shows he was promoted to SP4 on 6 December 1968, the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty and he held this rank until he was reduced to PFC for misconduct on 22 August 1969. The evidence of record also confirms the applicant was granted de facto status during the period he erroneously held the rank of SGT from 5 November 1970 to 22 November 1972. Based on the applicant's erroneous promotion to SGT and lacking evidence to corroborate the applicant's claim he did not...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013335

    Original file (20130013335.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He would like to have his DD Form 214 corrected to show his rank and pay grade as E-4. His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows in: * Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) he was promoted to pay grade E-2 on 20 December 1969; the advancement to pay grade E-3 and promotion to pay grade E-4 are lined through * Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) all the awards listed on his DD Form 214 8. Without evidence, it appears his pay grade was E-2 at time his separation on 7 June 1971.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056543C070420

    Original file (2001056543C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    His records also contain Department of the Army, U.S. Military Personnel Center (MILPERCEN) Orders Number D174-15, dated 24 September 1984, which placed him on the TDRL as a PFC/pay grade E-3 with an effective date of retirement as 22 October 1984 and with 80% disability. Law provides, in effect, that a service member may not be denied a promotion to which he or she would have otherwise been entitled were it not for the physical disability for which he or she was retired. Consistent with...