IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  17 September 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150002574 


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 256A (Honorable Discharge Certificate) dated 31 January 1963, by showing his correct name.  He further requests that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show his rank as specialist four (SP-4).

2.  The applicant states he believes the errors on his DD Form 214 and 
DD Form 256A were due to a lack of concentration by the person completing the forms.

3.  The applicant provides copies of:

* Certificate of Service – Armed Forces of the United States
* DD Form 214 
* DA Form 1270 (Transfer or Release to Reserve Component of the Army) dated 26 October 1956
* Letter Orders, Headquarters, II U.S. Army Corps, dated 31 January 1963
* DD Form 256A, dated 31 January 1963

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's military records are not available for review.  A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service member's records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  It is believed that his records were lost or destroyed in that fire.  However, there are sufficient documents available to conduct a fair and impartial review of this specific request.

3.  On 5 November 1954, the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States.  He was subsequently advanced to the rank of specialist three (SP-3) with a date of rank of 29 August 1956.

4.  On 25 October 1956, the applicant was released from active duty.  The 
DD Form 214 he was issued shows his name as used in this application and his rank as SP-3.

5.  A DD Form 1270 was issued on 26 October 1956 to announce the applicant’s transfer from active duty to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR).  This form shows the same name and rank as his DD Form 214.

6.  Records show that the U.S. Army changed its enlisted grade structure effective 1 June 1958.  During the period 1 July 1955 until 31 May 1958, the Army pay grade E-4 consisted of corporals and specialists three.  On 1 June 1958, the rank of specialist three was changed to specialist four, abbreviated as SP-4.

7.  On 31 January 1963, the applicant was discharged from the USAR.  The letter orders announcing his discharge and the corresponding DD Form 256A were issued using an incorrect spelling of the applicant’s name.  However, these documents did use the then current rank of SP-4.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his DD Form 256A, dated 31 January 1963, should be corrected by showing his name as indicated on his DD Form 214.  He further contends that his DD Form 214 should show his rank as SP-4.


2.  The available evidence shows that at the time of the applicant’s release from active duty, the rank of SP-4 did not exist.  Therefore, it would be inappropriate to show this rank on his DD Form 214.

3.  The available evidence shows that the applicant’s name on his DD Form 256A is spelled differently from what is shown on earlier documents issued at the time of his release from active duty.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to reissue him an Honorable Discharge Certificate using the same spelling as shown on his DD Form 214.

4.  It is noted that the Army changed its enlisted rank structure between the date of his release from active duty and discharge from the USAR.  When he was discharged in 1963, his USAR rank was SP-4 as shown on his DD Form 256A.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X____  ___X_____  ___X_____  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by issuing him an honorable discharge certificate showing he was discharged from the USAR on 31 January 1963.  This form should show his name as indicated on his DD Form 214 and his rank as SP-4.


2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to changing his rank on his DD Form 214.




      ___________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)                                         AR20150002574



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20150002574



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1