RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 2 March 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060009700 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests Item 4a (Grade) on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with a separation date of 5 September 1997 be changed to read SPC (specialist) instead of PFC (private first class). 2. The applicant states she was promoted to specialist/pay grade E-4 effective 1 June 1997. 3. The applicant provides copies of a judgment of divorce, dated 16 October 1998; a marriage certificate, dated 14 November 1998; a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 27 May 1997; and her DD Form 214. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which occurred on 5 September 1997, the date of her release from active duty. The application submitted in this case is dated 25 February 2004 and was received on 10 July 2006. 2. 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 allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file. 3. The applicant's military records show she enlisted on 2 October 1995 for a period of 4 years. She successfully completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty 71D (legal specialist). 4. The applicant submitted a DA Form 4187 (a copy of which is contained in the applicant’s official military personnel file [OMPF]), dated 27 May 1997, that authorized the applicant’s promotion to specialist/pay grade E-4, effective 1 June 1997. 5. On 5 September 1997, the applicant was released from active duty due to pregnancy. She had completed 1 year, 11 months, and 3 days of active service that was characterized as honorable. The applicant’s DD Form 214 contains the following entries: a. Item 1 (Name) - shows the applicant’s last name as B------D; b. Item 4a - PFC; c. Item 4b (Pay Grade) - E3; and d. Item 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade) - 1996 11 25 (1996 November 25). 6. The judgment of divorce, submitted by the applicant, shows she was authorized to return to the use of her maiden name, B----T, instead of B------D. 7. The marriage certificate, submitted by the applicant, shows her current last name is now W------I. 8. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. This regulation, in pertinent part, states that the active duty grade or rank and pay grade at the time of separation will be entered in Item 4a and 4b and the effective date of promotion will be entered in Item 12h of the DD Form 214. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The evidence shows that at the time of the applicant’s separation she had been promoted to specialist/pay grade E-4. Therefore, it is appropriate to correct Item 4a of the applicant’s DD Form 214 to read SPC instead of PFC, Item 4b to read E-4 instead of E3, and Item 12h to read 1997 06 01 (1997 June 1) instead of 1996 11 25. 2.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 5 September 1997, the date of her release from active duty; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 4 September 2000.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations; however, based on the available evidence, it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case. BOARD VOTE: ___jrh___ ___jcr___ ___tmr___ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief and to excuse failure to timely file. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending the following entries on the applicant’s DD Form 214: a. amend Item 4a to read SPC instead of PFC; b. amend Item 4b to read E-4 instead of E3; and c. amend Item 12h to read 1997 06 01. __________Thomas M. Ray____________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20060009700 SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED YYYYMMDD TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) DATE OF DISCHARGE YYYYMMDD DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR . . . . . DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION GRANT REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.