IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  3 September 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140017008 


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:

	a.  promotion to staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 and

	b.  correction of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 13 June 2002 to show her current legal name as N____ L____ A____.

2.  The applicant states, in effect:

* per Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), she was promotable the day of her discharge/retirement since she was medically discharged/retired
* she should have been promoted to SSG/E-6 1 day prior to her discharge/
retirement
* she wants her DD Form 214 updated to reflect her current legal name

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Forms 214 for the periods ending 11 October 1994 and 13 June 2002
* National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service)
* retirement orders
* removal from the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) orders
* 
marriage license
* Colorado driver's license

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.  Having prior service in the Regular Army, the applicant enlisted in the Colorado Army National Guard on 13 October 1994.  She was ordered to active duty in an Active Guard Reserve status on 11 March 1998.  She was promoted to sergeant (SGT)/E-5 effective 21 November 1998.

3.  There is no evidence which shows she was recommended for or was placed on a promotion list for SSG.

4.  On 13 June 2002, she was retired by reason of temporary disability and placed on the TDRL the following day.

5.  Her DD Form 214 for the period ending 13 June 2002 shows in:

* item 1 (Name – Last, First, Middle) – B____, N____ L____
* item 4a (Grade, Rate, or Rank) – SGT
* item 4b (Pay Grade) – E-5
* item 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade) – 21 November 1998

6.  She was removed from the TDRL on 3 August 2004 in the rank of SGT.

7.  She provided a marriage certificate, dated 19 February 2011, which shows she married and apparently changed her last name.

8.  In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from NGB.  The advisory official recommended disapproval of the applicant's requests.  The opinion stated:

	a.  There is no supporting documentation or record of the applicant graduating from the Basic Noncommissioned Officer Course (BNCOC).  Completion of BNCOC was a promotion requirement at the time.

	b.  If she were to be conditionally promoted (promoted before completion of the required Noncommissioned Officer Education System with the understanding she would finish within a year of accepted promotion), she was not eligible for a non-conditional promotion; therefore, she was not on a promotion list in 2002 or promoted to SSG at the time of her discharge.

	c.  Paragraph 1-20c of Army Regulation 600-8-19 states per the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1372, Soldiers on a promotion list at the time of retirement for disability will be retired for disability at the promotion list grade.  Further, the Soldier will be promoted to the designated grade effective the day before placement on the Retired List.

	d.  The applicant's legal name at the time of discharge is what was used to process her DD Form 214.  As her legal name was not changed until after discharge and married in 2011, there is no basis to correct or update her DD Form 214.

	e.  NGB Enlisted Policy Branch concurs with this recommendation.

9.  A copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for comment and possible rebuttal.  She did not respond.

10.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It established standardized policy for preparation of the DD Form 214 and stated the DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends she should have been promoted to SSG 1 day prior to her retirement since she was medically retired.  However, there is no evidence of record and the applicant provided no evidence which shows she was on a promotion list for SSG at the time of her retirement for disability.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence on which to base correcting her DD Form 214 to show her rank as SSG.

2.  The DD Form 214 is a "snapshot in time" and is a reflection of the applicant's record of active Army service at the time of her retirement.  The evidence shows she married in 2011 and apparently changed her last name (9 years after her retirement in 2002).  Therefore, there is no basis for amending item 1 of her DD Form 214.

3.  For historical purposes, the Army has an interest in maintaining the integrity of its records.  The data and information contained in those records should reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created.  In the absence of a showing of material error or injustice, there is a reluctance to recommend that those records be changed.

4.  The applicant is advised that a copy of this decisional document which confirms her legal name change will be filed in her Official Military Personnel File. This should serve to clarify any questions or confusion regarding the difference in the name recorded on her DD Form 214 and to satisfy her desire to have her current legal name documented in her military records.

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)                                         AR20140017008



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140017008



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1