RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 April 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070018484 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. Director Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Chairperson Member 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, in effect, the pay grade on his last DD Form 214 (Report of Separation From Active Duty) with an effective date of 18 August 1976 be corrected to show E-5. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he was a specialist five/pay grade E-5. He further states he is tired of the injustice imposed on him by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). It affects his physical body, mental health, and his secure income. He further states this error on such an important document is a further insult to his humanity. 3. The applicant provides no additional evidence or official documentation in support of his application. 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 personnel record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 August 1965 for a period of 3 years. He successfully completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty 91B (medical specialist). On 1 July 1968, the applicant was released from active duty as an overseas returnee and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group. He had completed 2 years, 10 months, and 19 days of active service that was characterized as honorable. On 12 August 1971, the applicant was discharged from the USAR Control Group. 3. On 11 February 1976, the applicant enlisted in the USAR Delayed Entry Program in pay grade E-2 for a period of 3 years under the Warrant Officer Flight Training Option (WOFT). 4. On 16 March 1976, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army in pay grade E-2 for a period of 3 years under the WOFT. 5. The applicant was promoted to specialist five/pay grade E-5 effective 25 April 1976 based on his entry in the U.S. Army Warrant Officer Fixed Wing or Rotary Wing Aviator Course. 6. On 3 August 1976, the applicant was administratively eliminated from the Warrant Officer Rotary Wing Aviator Course due to medical reasons. It was also determined the applicant should not be considered for further flight training. 7. On 3 August 1976, the applicant, having been found to be medically disqualified for Class 1A flying, requested to be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations). 8. On 9 August 1976, the applicant's request for discharge was approved. 9. The records do not contain orders showing an administrative reduction of the applicant to pay grade E-2. 10. On 13 August 1976, the applicant was discharged by reason of failure to meet established physical standards, no disability. He had completed 4 months and 18 days of active service that was characterized as honorable. 11. Item 6a (Grade, Rate or Rank) of the applicant's DD Form 214 contains the entry "PV2" (private) and Item 6b (Pay Grade) contains the entry "E2." 12. Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, provided for the discharge of individuals who enlist on or after 1 March 1971 for the WOFT option and who, subsequent to enlistment, fail to qualify medically for flight training and the medical condition would permanently disqualify the individual for flight training. 13. Chapter 7 of Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), in effect at the time, provided for the appointment of personnel in pay grade E-4 or below to pay grade E-5 upon entrance into an officer candidate school, the U.S. Army Warrant Officer Fixed Wing or Rotary Wing Aviator Course, or a DA-approved Physicians' Assistant Program. 14. Chapter 7 of Army Regulation 600-200, in effect at the time, provided for Fixed Wing and Rotary Wing Aviator pilot trainees who were appointed to a higher grade upon entering training and who failed to complete the course successfully to be reduced to the grade held at time of entry. 15. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), then in effect, established the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. This regulation, in pertinent part, stated that the active duty grade or rank and pay grade at the time of separation will be entered in Item 4a and 4b of the DD Form 214. 16. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The regulation provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends his last DD Form 214 should show he was an E-5 when he was discharged. 2. The applicant was enlisted in pay grade E-2 in March 1976 and, as provided by regulations in effect at the time, he was promoted to pay grade E-5 based on his entry in WOFT. 3. The applicant was administratively eliminated from WOFT effective 3 August 1976. 4. The regulations in effect at the time provided for the administrative reduction of individuals who failed to complete WOFT to the grade held at the time of enlistment. In this case, the applicant was enlisted in pay grade E-2. 5. Although the record does not contain orders reducing the applicant to pay grade E-2 prior to discharge it is presumed that the Army's administrative processing of the applicant subsequent to his elimination from WOFT is correct. Therefore, the entries contained in Items 6a and 6b are correct. 6. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement. 7. Health care, both physical and mental, of Soldiers subsequent to their discharge is the responsibility of the DVA. Any claims or issues concerning treatment or compensation for service connected disabilities should be addressed to that Agency. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __PHM __ __KSJ__ __JGH__ 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. ___ PHM ___ CHAIRPERSON ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20070018484 5 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 1901 SOUTH BELL STREET 2ND FLOOR ARLINGTON, VA 22202-4508