BOARD DATE: 1 December 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110010035 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, in a somewhat confusing application, that her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show that she was released from active duty (REFRAD) in the rank of sergeant (SGT) and that all of her combat awards be added as well. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that she was promoted to the rank of sergeant; however, her DD Form 214 reflects that she was separated in the rank and pay grade of Specialist (SPC)/E-4. She also desires that all of her combat awards be added to her DD Form 214. 3. The applicant provides 17 pages of handwritten notes and photographs. 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 16 October 2001 for a period of 4 years, training as a motor transport operator, and assignment to Europe. She completed her basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina and her advanced individual training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri before being transferred to Kaiserslautern, Germany for assignment to a transportation company as a truck driver. She was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 16 October 2003. 3. On 8 January 2004 she was deployed to Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom II and she was promoted to the rank of SGT on 1 October 2004 at Forward Operating Base (FOB) Speicher. She deployed back to Germany on 19 February 2005 and on 15 October 2005, she was honorably REFRAD due to completion of required service. 4. She had completed 4 years of active service and her DD Form 214 issued at the time of her REFRAD shows that she was awarded the Army Commendation Medal, the Army Good Conduct Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon, and the Driver and Mechanic Badge. 5. A review of her official records failed to reveal any awards that are not already reflected on her DD Form 214. 6. Army Regulation 635-5 serves as the authority for the preparation of the DD Form 214. It provides, in pertinent part, that information entered on the DD Form 214 will be information obtained from official records at the time of separation. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s contention that her DD Form 214 does not reflect her proper rank of a SGT has been noted and found to have merit. The evidence of record shows that she was promoted to the rank of SGT on 1 October 2004 and there is no evidence in her official records of her being reduced in grade. Accordingly, her DD Form 214 should be corrected to reflect that rank. 2. The applicant’s contention that all of her awards are not reflected on her DD Form 214 has also been noted and on the surface appears to lack merit. While the applicant does not specify which awards are missing from her records, a review of her official records failed to show evidence of any awards that are not reflected on her DD Form 214. 3. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to show that she is entitled to awards that are not reflected on her DD Form 214, there is no basis to grant that part of her request. 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. deleting from block 4a of her DD Form 214 the entry "SPC" and replacing it with the entry "SGT”; b. deleting from block 4b of her DD Form 214 the entry "E-4" and replacing it with the entry “E5”; and c. deleting from block 12h of her DD Form 214 the “2003 10 16” and replacing it with the entry “2004 10 01.” 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 adding additional awards to her DD Form 214. __________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) AR20110010035 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110010035 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1