BOARD DATE: 14 April 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170017243 APPLICANT REQUESTS: * correction of her rank/grade at the time of her enlistment into the Army National Guard (ARNG) from sergeant (SGT)/E-5 to staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 * correction of unspecified enlistment documents to reflect her high school attendance APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team Orders 023-054, dated 22 January 2010 * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), covering the period from 30 January 2003 through 21 February 2012 * DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 13 November 2012 * DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States), dated 13 November 2012 * National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 21 (Annex A to DD Form 4 – Enlistment/Reenlistment Agreement –Army National Guard (ARNG), dated 13 November 2012 * partial DD Form 1966 (Record of Military Processing – Armed Forces of the United States), dated 14 November 2012 * ARNG Orders 266-038, dated 23 September 2015 * NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), dated 12 November 2015 FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code, section 1552(b); however, the ABCMR conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states: a. She requests to correct her enlistment rank/grade back to SSG/E-6 because the DA Form 4187, dated 13 November 2012 is fraudulent. The person listed in the remarks section of the form is a male. The other information in that section, such as date of rank and pay entry basic date is not her information either. The digital signature was “whited-out” with a new written signature in her signature block. b. She would also like to correct the high school in her contract because she did not attend high school in; this information is not correct in her file. She attended high school in. She tried to update this information, but officials at Camp Mabry told her it is too late to fix anything in her file. c. Her record is in error because falsified documents were used to deceive a SSG into enlistment into the ARNG. Her concern is that the DA Form 4187 was falsified by the recruiter in her signature block, which can be seen because it was already digitally signed, as indicated by the check mark in the signature block. She did not sign a DA Form 4187 because someone’s DA Form 4187 was in her enlistment contract on 12 November 2012 and she showed it to the recruiter. The recruiter called her on 13 November 2012 and told her all the documents were good to go, so she went to the recruiter’s office and signed the enlistment contract. She then went to her identification card (ID) card the next day, when the officials there asked her for her new date of rank. She then noticed the DA Form 4187 had her information on the top and it was also signed in the signature block section, but not by her. 3. A DD Form 4 shows the applicant initially enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve on 8 March 2001. Her initial DD Form 1966, signed and dated by the applicant on 6 March 2001, shows the following entries in item 22 (Education): * from 1991/10 to 2000/11, graduate: no * from 1987/08 to 1992/06, , graduate: yes * the typed entry has a handwritten line strike-through with an illegible handwritten school written above, that appears to read * 4. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 January 2003. Her accompanying DD Form 1966, signed and dated by the applicant on 30 January 2003 shows the following single entry for her education in item 22, which conflicts with her prior DD Form 1966: * from 1991/10 to 2000/11, graduate: yes 5. The applicant deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom on the following occasions: * from 23 February 2002 through 23 November 2003, with service in Kuwait * from 5 August 2009 through 5 August 2010 with service in Iraq. 6. 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team Orders 023-054, dated 22 January 2010, promoted the applicant from the rank/grade of SGT/E-5 to SSG/E-6 effective 1 February 2010. 7. Her DD Form 214 shows she was honorable discharged from the Regular Army due to parenthood on 21 February 2012, after 9 years and 22 days of net active service, with a Separation Program Designator (SPD) of JDG (Parenthood) and a Reentry (RE) Code of “3.” Her rank/grade is listed as SSG/E-6. 8. A Texas ARNG memorandum, dated 9 November 2012, states an administrative waiver request for SGT W____ (the applicant), submitted in accordance with Fiscal Year 12/13 ARNG Accession Options Supplement, First Edition, dated 13 February 2012 was reviewed for the disqualifications of SPD code JDG, RE code of “3,” and narrative reason for separation of parenthood. The waiver was approved for enlistment and was valid for a period of 6 months. 9. A DD Form 4, signed and dated by the applicant on 13 November 2012, shows she enlisted in the ARNG on 13 November 2012 for a period of 3 years, beginning in the rank/grade of SGT/E-5. 10. The applicant provide a signed and dated an NGB Form 21, which she signed and dated on 13 November 2012, stating she was a prior service member with no remaining statutory military service obligation and her enlistment required her to commence training with an ARNG unit immediately. 11. The applicant provided a copy of a DA Form 4187, dated 13 November 2012, from the Recruiting and Retention Command, San Antonio, TX to the TX Adjutant General which shows: * the requested personnel action was grade reduction * the applicant’s duty status was changed from SSG/E-6 to SGT/E-5 effective 13 November 2012 * item 9 (Signature of Soldier) does not contain an electronic signature, but a handwritten, illegible signature with a check next to it and a typed date of 13 November 2012 * Section IV (Remarks) contains the statement: “I T___ S____ [note not the applicant’s name] voluntarily accept to be reduced in grade SSG/E-6 to SGT/E-5 for the purpose of enlistment into the TXARNG * Section IV also shows the applicant’s unit of enlistment as 112th Combat Support Company (correct), her active time as 9 years and 21 days (almost correct; it was 9 years and 22 days), her pay entry basic date as 3 December 2001 (incorrect), and date of rank as 13 November 2012 (which is the date of the form) * the request was approved and the form was digitally signed by Major (MAJ) J____ P____ on 13 November 2012 12. A DD Form 1966, signed and dated by the applicant on 14 November 2012, in conjunction with her ARNG enlistment, shows in item 19 (Accession Data) her enlistment pay grade to be E-5 and shows the following single entry for her education in item 22, which conflicts with both of her prior DD Forms 1966: * from 1990/08 to 1994/06, graduate: yes 13. All three of the applicant’s DD Forms 1966 throughout her military service, all signed by the applicant, list multiple differing school names and periods of attendance with no overlap in consistency in the listed information. There is no available supporting documentation to corroborate what the applicant provided to her recruiters at the time of her enlistments and/or what her actual school names and dates of attendance were. 14. Army National Guard Orders 266-038, dated 23 September 2015, honorably discharged the applicant from the ARNG effective 12 November 2015, due to the expiration of her term of service. The orders list the applicant’s rank as SGT. 15. The NGB provided an advisory opinion on 19 February 2010, stating: a. The applicant requests correction of her rank from SGT to SSG at the time of her enlistment in the TXARNG on 13 November 2012 and the removal of an erroneous DA Form 4187. The DA Form 4187 in question was attached to the applicant’s request for correction; however there is no record of the DA Form 4187 in her permanent records. This matter is considered corrected with no further action to be taken. b. Additionally, a DA Form 4187 is not a standard document included in an enlistment packet for a prior service or non-prior service recruit. There is no evidence to indicate that the applicant did not sign and accept her enlistment contract in good faith, indicating her rank/grade would be SGT/E-5 at the time of her enlistment in the TXARNG. Her enlistment contract shows she enlisted in the TXARNG on 13 November 2012 as a SGT/E-5. 16. The applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion on 28 February 2020 and given an opportunity to submit comments. She responded on 3 March 2020, providing a copy of her already submitted application with supporting documents as well as an excerpt from Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) and copies of her identification ID cards. In her rebuttal she states: a. The truth is the recruiter told her that her rank was being determined by the TXARNG. When she was joining the TXARNG, he told her she could not keep her SSG rank at that time. He later told her that a reduction board was already done for her because she could not keep her rank. She later found he lied to her about this. b. She found out when she went to get her ID card. The clerk told her that her rank was not correct on her contract because the system was still showing her SSG rank and he would need something showing a reduction of rank to change her rank in the ID system. c. She went back to the recruiter about this and he gave her a DA Form 4187 with a signature on it. She never signed a DA Form 4187 because she was waiting for the rank determination. She waited 1 month and was willing to wait another month. She found out from another recruiter that a determination of rank was not required because she was only off active duty for 9 months. If she was off active duty for 48 months, then she would need to have a rank determination. She later found out that neither a determination of rank nor a reduction board was ever done for her. She has been trying to get her rank corrected ever since. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application, supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The applicant’s contentions, the military record, an NGB advisory opinion, and regulatory guidance were carefully considered. The Board concluded there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice which would warrant a change to the applicant’s rank or enlistment documents. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :X :X :X DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 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. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, United States 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 ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3 year statute of limitations if the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Reserve Components Enlistment Program), dated 8 February 2011, the version in effect at the time, governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and the Army National Guard (ARNG). Paragraph 3-18, provides guidance on enlistment pay grades for prior service for Reserve Component enlistment and states: a. An applicant who is a former enlisted member of the Armed Forces in the grade of E-5 or higher who enlists within 48 months from last separation will be enlisted in the grade held at the time of last separation. Prior service applicants who enlist within 24 months of discharge will be given an adjusted date of rank (DOR) of the original DOR plus elapsed time since discharge. For example, if original DOR is 1 November 1998 and elapsed time since discharge is 14 months, adjusted DOR is 1 January 2000. Applicants who enlist more than 24 months after discharge will be given a DOR of the date of enlistment. b. An applicant who is a former enlisted member of the Armed Forces in the grade of E-5 through E-9 and who enlists after 48 months from last separation and have no remaining military service obligation (MSO) will be enlisted one grade lower than the grade held at the time of last separation. Waivers for former Soldiers in the grade of E-6 through E-9 may be considered. c. Paragraph 8-7 states correction of enlistment grade, after enlistment documents have been executed, is to be accomplished by a promotion or reduction action. Enlistment documents will not be altered to reflect the different grade. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20170017243 6 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1