IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 January 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150006281 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 correction of the rank on his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States). 2. The applicant states, "request change of rank from PVT-2 [private/E-2] to PVT-1 [private/grade E-1]" and that he was "completely unaware of any opportunity to upgrade [his] rank at the time, until recently." a. He states that he was assigned to regimental supply at Camp Fuji, Japan in late 1952/early 1953. As a matter of routine, the unit conducted weekly meetings each Friday to discuss ways to improve operations. b. Shortly after the applicant arrived, the supply sergeant completed his overseas assignment and returned to the United States. A noncommissioned officer (NCO) with a military occupational specialty (MOS) of "mess sergeant" replaced the supply sergeant. The NCO soon began to berate one particular Soldier because of his Jewish heritage and the applicant "took-up" for the Soldier. He then wrote a list of a few suggestions for the upcoming weekly meeting; however, a meeting was not held that week. c. The following Sunday, the applicant was told to report to the commanding officer where he was confronted by the commander, the NCO, and other witnesses. He was accused of circulating a petition because he had left his list of suggestions on his desk, some other Soldiers put their signatures on the document, and it was given to the commander. He felt his privacy had been invaded and that he had been betrayed by the Soldiers. d. He was reduced in rank and shortly thereafter he received orders to Korea. He was ordered to the front line to engage the enemy with the stipulation that he had not been trained in the operation of small arms. e. Upon arrival in Korea, he was assigned to Company I, 34th Infantry Regiment. The commander reviewed his orders and stated that the applicant was a victim of an unjust accusation. He adds that he served in Korea until he was returned to the United States due to the serious health condition of his mother. 3. The applicant provides a self-authored statement (summarized above). 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 service records are not available to the Board for review. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members' records at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in 1973. It is believed the applicant's records were lost or destroyed in that fire. However, his DD Form 214 (Copy 1, Member), that he forwarded to NPRC on 31 July 2000 with a previous request for his awards and decorations, is available to serve as a reconstructed record for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case. 3. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was inducted and entered into active duty on 29 November 1951, honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) on 21 September 1953, and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (Infantry). a. He had completed 1 year, 9 months, and 23 days of net service this period; 1 year, 1 month, and 11 days of other service; and 2 years, 11 months, and 4 days of total net service for pay purposes. It also shows in: * item 3 (Grade – Rate – Rank and Date of Appointment): "Pvt-1 (P) 24 Apr 53" [Private, Grade E-1 (Permanent), 24 April 1953] (It also shows the entry "Pvt-1" was "typed-over" to show "Pvt-2") * item 18 (Grade – Rate or Rank at Time of Entry into Active Service): "Private E-1" b. The disbursing (pay) officer verified the information on the document, the authorized (personnel) officer authenticated the document, and the applicant placed his signature on the document. 4. There is no evidence in the available military service records that shows the applicant was advanced or promoted to PVT-2 during the period of service under review (i.e., from 24 April 1953 through 21 September 1953). 5. Service Regulations Number 615-360-1 (Discharge Procedures and Preparation of Separation Forms), in effect at the time of the applicant's separation from the Army, prescribed the discharge procedures and separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge, release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army. It also established standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. It shows the DD Form 214 is completed from the Soldier's Service Record, Qualification Card, Immunization Register, and other available records. During preparation of the DD Form 214, the correction of a typographic error on the DD Form 214 (i.e., by a pen and ink change) was not authorized. If a typographic error was made and discovered, the DD Form 214 was to be destroyed and a new DD Form 214 completed. Errors discovered after the DD Form 214 was issued were to be made by issuing a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends, in effect, that the grade of rank on his DD Form 214 should be corrected. 2. The sincerity of the applicant's comments and the comments he attributes to his company commander in Korea with respect to his reduction in rank is not in dispute. 3. The available copy of the applicant's DD Form 214 shows he entered active duty in the U.S. Army on 29 November 1991 in the rank of PVT-1, which would have been a permanent appointment. a. It also shows he was separated from active duty on 21 September 1953 in the rank of PVT-1 with a permanent date of appointment of 24 April 1953. This suggests he was reduced in rank (i.e., from PVT-2 to PVT-1), which is consistent with his comments. b. There is no evidence of record that shows the applicant was advanced or promoted to PVT-2 subsequent to 24 April 1953 through the date of his separation (i.e., on 21 September 1953). c. The pay officer, the personnel officer, and the applicant reviewed and verified the information on the DD Form 214, which included the applicant's grade of rank at the time of his separation from active duty. d. Item 3 of his DD Form 214 shows the entry "Pvt-1" was changed (i.e., "typed-over") to show "Pvt-2", which was not the proper administrative method to correct an erroneous entry. 4. Based on the evidence of record, it appears the typed entry in item 3 of the applicant's DD Form 214 was changed by someone other than a U.S. government official 5. Thus, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to grant the requested relief. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____X___ ____X___ ____X___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. 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. 2. The Board wants the applicant and all others to know the sacrifices the former service member made in service to the United States during the Korean War are deeply appreciated. The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms. ___________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) AR20150006281 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150006281 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1