Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017138
Original file (20140017138.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:  	  

		BOARD DATE:  12 May 2015	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140017138 


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, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show his rank as captain (CPT) or the highest rank possible vice chief warrant officer three (CW3).

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  He is requesting advancement to the rank of CPT or the highest rank possible for the explicit purpose of [having the rank placed on] his gravesite head stone.  In the 1970's, he served in positions as a single pilot for the Post Commander, Fort Campbell, KY.  He flew twin engine airplanes and a variety of helicopters and the position called for the highest experience level.

	b.  He wants his active duty rank advanced to the maximum rank possible with no monetary consideration for the rank adjustment.  He has not been receiving military retired pay since April 1992 as he converted all his military time to civil service for one annuity.

	c.  He estimated that 40 to 50 percent of his Army fixed wing flight time was spent transporting military dignitaries (i.e., Westmorland and Ambassador Unger from Bangkok).  In the early 1950's, Mrs. Roosevelt flew with him frequently in North Africa and in Europe.  He would like this done in the near future as he is 83 years old and was exposed to 47 months of herbicides in Korea and during two tours of Vietnam.


3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214, orders, a letter, and certificate.

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 had prior enlisted service in the U.S. Air Force, the applicant was appointed as a U.S. Army Reserve Warrant Officer One (WO1) on 20 May 1965 with a concurrent call to active duty.  He held military occupational specialty 101C0 (Fixed Wing Pilot, Multi-Engine).  On 23 January 1970, he was promoted to the rank/grade of CW3/W-3 in the Army of the United States.

3.  He provides and his record contains Letter Orders Number S10-347, dated 27 October 1971, issued by the Department of the Army, voluntarily retiring him from active duty effective 30 November 1971 and placing him on the Retired List effective 1 December 1971 in the retired rank of CW3.

4.  He was honorably retired from active duty on 30 November 1971 and he was placed on the Retired List on 1 December 1971 in the rank of CW3.  He completed a total of 21 years, 6 months, and 7 days of creditable active service.  Item 5a (Grade Rate or Rank) of the DD Form 214 he was issued shows his rank as CW3.

5.  The applicant provides a:

	a.  Letter from the Federal Aviation Administration, dated 4 February 2000, wherein it stated the applicant was employed by the Federal Aviation Administration, Nashville, TN, as an Aviation Safety Inspector from 20 April 1980 until his retirement on 27 July 1992.

	b.  Certificate from the State of Tennessee, dated 18 March 2000, wherein it stated the applicant was commissioned as a major (MAJ)/O-4 in the Tennessee State Guard from 17 February 2000.
6.  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 states 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.

7.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1370 provides an officer will be retired in the highest rank/grade served on active duty satisfactorily.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant held the rank of CW3 at the time he was retired from active duty on 30 November 1971 and he was properly placed on the Retired List in the rank of CW3, the highest rank he held during his active duty service.  

2.  The applicant's honorable service is noted; however, his rank is properly shown on his DD Form 214.  The DD Form 214 is a record of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty service.  There are no provisions for correcting the DD Form 214 or the retired rank to show a rank higher than the Soldier held when he was released from active service.  Therefore, he is not entitled to the requested relief.

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)                                         AR20140017138



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140017138



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006771

    Original file (20120006771.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) shows in: a. item 5 (Oversea Service), he served in the RVN from 6 April 1968 to 3 May 1969 and in Germany from 10 June 1969 to 25 April 1972; b. item 9 (Awards, Decorations and Campaigns), award of the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), Army Aviator Badge, Parachutist Badge, RVN Campaign Medal (RVNCM) with Device (1960), Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), Presidential Unit Citation (PUC), RVN Gallantry Cross (RVNGC) with Gold Star,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013559

    Original file (20070013559.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant contends if he had been promoted to LTC with a date of rank of 24 June 1983, it would have given him the time in grade and the active duty service requirement to retire in the grade of LTC. The opinion continues that the applicant's promotion eligibility date to LTC was 23 September 1989, however, he was appointed a warrant officer on 24 June 1988 and was not eligible for promotion consideration to LTC. Additionally, the applicant contends that his records should show he was...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010230

    Original file (20090010230.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 13 December 2007 he was appointed as a warrant officer one (WO1) in the Oklahoma Army National Guard (OKARNG) and believes he should have been appointed in a higher rank due to his prior training and service. A second advisory opinion notes that in order to qualify for appointment as a WO2, a candidate must meet all training requirements. Since all Army aviators must be accessed as helicopter pilots (MOS 154A) first and the applicant had no training in helicopters, he could only be...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017334

    Original file (20090017334.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was honorably retired on 30 April 2009 and placed on the retired list in his retired grade of CW3 on 1 May 2009. It provides that an enlisted member or a warrant officer who is retired with less than 30 years of active service is entitled, when their active service plus their service on the Retired List totals 30 years, to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade in which they served on active duty satisfactorily as determined by the Secretary of the Army. The law allows for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012831

    Original file (20140012831.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides: * correspondence regarding his direct appointment as a commissioned officer in the U.S. Army Reserve * DD Form 214 * letter of appreciation with corresponding indorsements * college transcripts * letter regarding a student loan * three diplomas showing a bachelor of arts, a doctor of philosophy, and the successful completion of a postgraduate course * recommendation for work as a provider with Choice Behavioral Health Partnership * DA Form 1256 (Incentive Award...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008470

    Original file (20140008470.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the Unites States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show: * additional awards of the Air Medal * the Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device * the Distinguished Flying Cross 2. The applicant provides: * an Air Medal Citation, undated, wherein it shows he was presented the Air Medal for the period 10 to 22 August 1971 * an Air Medal...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005294

    Original file (20130005294.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 December 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130005294 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). While it is clear that the applicant flew 1,058 hours of combat time as a pilot, the DA Form 759-1 only shows 23 combat missions flown in July 1971.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011686

    Original file (20080011686.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant, an authorized agent working on behalf of the former service member (FSM), requests that the FSM's Air Medal with "V" Device be upgraded to the Silver Star. The applicant provides, through the office of a Member of Congress, an undated facsimile (fax) transmission sheet which was used to forward the application to this agency; a letter from the Member of Congress addressed to this agency, dated 21 July 2008, providing details regarding the FSM's brave service to this country;...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120011934

    Original file (20120011934.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20110022035, on 1 May 2012. On 14 October 2009, in response to his petition to be retired and receive retired pay in the highest grade satisfactorily held (CPT), the Board granted him relief in the form of a correction of his records to show he was retired in the highest grade he had...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070014131

    Original file (20070014131.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his military record to show he flew a total of 584 hours of combat flight time. Item 30 of this form shows the applicant's grade as WO1. This administrative error was carried forward in Item 32 on Sheets 5-3, 6-1, 6-2, 6-3, and 6-4; and Item 13 on Sheets 5 and 6 of the applicant's flight record.