RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 December 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070010291 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. Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano Director Mrs. Nancy L. Amos Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Mr. William D. Powers Chairperson Mr. Michael J. Flynn Member Ms. Sherry J. Stone Member 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 that item 32 (Remarks) of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show his date of appointment as 28 June 1962, the same date as shown in item 3b (Date of Rank). 2. The applicant states, in effect, that 28 June 1962 is the correct date of his appointment to Specialist Four (SP4), E-4. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214. 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 11 January 1961. 3. On 28 June 1962, the applicant was promoted to the temporary rank of SP4. 4. On 28 June 1963, the applicant was promoted to the permanent rank of SP4. 5. The applicant was honorably released from active duty on 10 January 1964. 6. Item 3b of the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows his date of rank as 28 June 1962. In pertinent part, item 32 refers to item 3b and shows his date of appointment as 28 June 1963. 7. Army Regulation 624-200 (Promotions, Demotions, and Reductions, Appointment and Reduction of Enlisted Personnel), in effect at the time, prescribed the policies and procedures governing appointment and reduction of all enlisted personnel on active duty, other than active duty for training. It stated, in pertinent part, that promotion to a permanent grade terminated a temporary appointment in the same grade. 8. Army Regulation 635-5 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. The version in effect at the time stated, in pertinent part, that if the date of rank was different from the date of appointment in grade, then the date of appointment would be entered in item 32. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. It appears that at the time the applicant served the terms “promotion” and “appointment” were used almost interchangeably. 2. The applicant was promoted to the temporary rank of SP4 on 28 June 1962. That date then became his date of rank, the date from which his time in grade was calculated to determine when he was next eligible for a (temporary) promotion. 3. The applicant was then promoted (i.e., “appointed”) to the permanent rank of SP4 on 28 June 1963. 4. There is no error in item 32 of the applicant’s DD Form 214. The different dates are meant to convey two different actions; i.e., his temporary promotion that determined his date of rank was listed in item 3b and his permanent promotion date was listed in item 32. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __wdp___ __mjf___ __sjs___ 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. __William D. Powers___ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070010291 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20071211 TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION DENY REVIEW AUTHORITY Ms. Mitrano ISSUES 1. 100.00 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.