IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  6 October 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150003855 


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 restoration of his rank and back pay as a specialist four (SP4) to 14 February 1987.

2.  The applicant states he was promoted to SP4 (E-4) on 14 February 1987 but was never paid in that rank.  He was wrongfully treated at the time of his discharge and the Army needs to right the wrongs that he has suffered since his wrongful discharge.

3.  The applicant provides of reissued DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), and 9 DA Forms 3686-1 (Leave and Earnings Statement (LES)).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant entered active duty on 26 February 1986.

2.  His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) shows –

* advancement to SP4(E-4) on 26 August 1986
* assignment to duty in Germany effective 17 May 1987

3.  The LES's provided cover the period from 1 August 1986 through 31 March 1987.  All of the forms show the applicant as an E-3.


4.  The applicant provided a DA Form 4187 with a partially unreadable date of approval that appears to be in February 1987.  It states – 

* Advanced to: – Specialist Four, E-4
* Authority: – AR 601-210, Table 2-3, E(3)
* Effective Date: – 16 February 1987
* Date of Rank: – 26 August 1986 
* Under "Additional Instructions" –

* The applicant had completed 63 hours of college credit with transcripts attached
* The Soldier has the right to submit a DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Records Under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552) to request correction of his effective date corrected to match his date of rank 
* The applicant entered a pen and ink change to show 83 credit hours

5.  There is no evidence the applicant applied for this correction of his records at that time. 

6.  Court-martial charges were preferred for commission of an indecent act and sodomy with a fellow Soldier.  The applicant elected to request discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial.  He is shown to have been a SP4 at this time.

7.  The discharge authority approved the discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) and directed the applicant be reduced from SP4 to the lowest enlisted grade. 

8.  On 13 July 1987, the applicant was discharged with a UOTHC in the pay grade E-1.

9.  On 20 May 2014, the ABCMR upgraded the applicant's to honorable and afforded him a change of reason to "Secretarial Authority" with the issuance of a revised DD Form 214.  The Board did not address restoration of his rank at that time.





10.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  It provides that when a Soldier is to be discharged under other than honorable conditions, the separation authority will direct an immediate reduction to the lowest enlisted grade.

11.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program), paragraph 2-4 (Pay grade and data of rank), as then in effect, stated persons enlisting in the Regular Army without prior service will be enlisted in pay grade E-1.  Exceptions are as shown in table 2-3 or when the enlistment option authorizes a higher entry pay grade.  Table 2-3, Rule E provides the potential for accelerated advancement to qualified applicants based upon "college" lever education.  Personnel with at least 60 but less than 90 college semester hours could be enlisted in pay grade E-3 with advancement to E-4 after completion of twelve months of continuous active military service and recommendation by the unit commander.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Since the reason for the applicant's reduction was based on a UOTHC discharge that has since been changed to honorable, the reason for the reduction is no longer valid and his rank at discharge should be restored.

2.  The DA Form 4187 shows the applicant was advanced to SP4 with a date of rank 26 August 1986; however, his effective date of rank was 16 February 1987. The effective date, not the date of rank, is the date that governs entitlement to increased pay.  

3.  It appears from the statement on the DA Form 4187 that the applicant had provided documentation showing he had completed either 63 or 83 college credits thereby meeting the criteria for accelerated advancement to E-4 after completion of twelve months of continuous active military service.  Under Army Regulation 601-210, Table 2-3, the applicant's effective date of advancement would be 16 February 1987.

4.  The applicant is not shown to be entitled to pay as a SP4 prior to 16 February 1987.  The LES's after the effective date of his advancement (16 February 1987) should show entitlement to pay and allowances as an E-3 not an E-4.

5.  Since the Board does not have access to all of the applicant's pay records, it is impossible to determine if the error in his pay grade was corrected after the issuance of the 31 March 1987 LES.

6.  Since this is a pay issue related to records held by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) and not currently readily available to the Board, DFAS should undertake an audit of the applicant's pay records and determine if he was paid as an E-4 from 16 February 1987 through his date of discharge on 13 July 1987.

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:

   a.  restoring the applicant's rank to SP4, E-4 and correcting his rank, pay grade, and effective date of pay grade on his reissued DD Form 214; 
   
   b.  directing DFAS to audit the applicant's pay records for the period from 16 February 1987 through 13 July 1987 to determine if he received the proper pay and allowances; and 
   
   c.  showing the applicant is retroactively entitled to payment of any pay or allowances not received during the period from 16 February 1987 through 13 July 1987.
   
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 an earlier effective date of advancement to SP4 with entitlement to pay in that rank prior to 16 February 1987.


      ___________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)                                         AR20150003855



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20150003855



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1