IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 December 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130006957 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 that all of his separation documents, to include his Honorable Discharge Certificate, be corrected to show he was discharged in the rank and pay grade of private first class (PFC)/E-3. 2. The applicant states that when he graduated from his advanced individual training, he had PFC stripes on his dress green uniform; however, when he was discharged in 1995, all of his separation documents show him as a private (PVT)/E-2. 3. The applicant provides copies of his DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), Honorable Discharge Certificate, and NGB Forms 22 (National Guard Bureau Report of Separation and Record of Service). 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 initially enlisted in the Missouri Army National Guard (MOARNG) on 7 November 1983 for training as a military policeman. He was ordered to active duty training (ADT) at Fort McClellan, Alabama on 8 January 1984. On 18 May 1984, he was honorably released from ADT and was honorably discharged from the MOARNG under Entry Level Separation (ELS) for failure to complete his training. He was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Individual Ready Reserve) in the pay grade of E-1. He was separated from the ARNG on 18 May 1984. 3. On 15 May 1987, he again enlisted in the MOARNG with a waiver for training as a combat engineer. He was ordered to ADT at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri to undergo his one-station unit training on 29 May 1987. He completed his training and was released from ADT on 23 July 1987 in the pay grade of E-1 and was transferred back to his MOARNG unit. He was promoted to the pay grade of E-2 on 11 December 1987 and to the pay grade of E-3 on 6 May 1988. 4. On 3 December 1988, he was reduced to the pay grade of E-2 for unsatisfactory participation and on 11 June 1989 he was discharged under honorable conditions from the MOARNG due to unsatisfactory participation. He was discharged in the pay grade of E-2 and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Individual Ready Reserve). He did not sign his NGB Form 22. On 16 May 1995, he was honorably discharged from the USAR in the pay grade of E-2. 5. A review of his official records shows that the applicant accumulated 20 periods of unsatisfactory participation during a period of 1 year and that he made no effort on his part to resolve the matter. It also appears that the applicant’s commander took the action required by regulations after all attempts to resolve the applicant’s problems had proved futile. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s contention that all of his separation documents should reflect that he was discharged in the pay grade of E-3 has been noted and found to lack merit. 2. The evidence of record clearly shows that he was reduced to the pay grade of E-2 due to unsatisfactory participation and was subsequently discharged for the same reason in the pay grade of E-2. 3. The applicant did not participate in the MOARNG prior to or after his reduction to the pay grade of E-2 and he was not available to sign his NGB Form 22 at the time of his discharge from the MOARNG. 4. Accordingly, it appears that he was properly reduced in grade and his separation documents reflect his correct rank and pay grade. Therefore, there appears to be no basis to grant his request. 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) AR20130006957 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130006957 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1