ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  5 August 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20180002804


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty) to reflect E-6 rather than E-5

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 367d (Armory Drill Pay Roll) 

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United 
States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of 
Military Records 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 that his DD Form 214 should reflect E-6 rather than E-5. 

3.  The applicant provides a NGB Form 367d dated 17 October 1956, reflective of drill 
performed from 1 February to 30 April 1956.  The applicant’s name is listed under the 
Sergeant First Class (E-6) portion of the document.

4.  A review of the applicant’s service records reflects the following on: 

*	13 June 1953 – he was inducted into the Army National Guard 
*	1 October 1953 – he was promoted to Private (E-2) 
*	1 January 1954 – he was promoted to Private First Class (E-3)
*	1 August 1954 – he was promoted to Corporal (E-4)
*	1 January 1956 – he was promoted to Specialist Second Class (E-5)
*	9 April 1956 – he was promoted to Specialist First Class (E-6)

5.  A review of the applicant’s DA Form 24 (Service record) reflects the following 
information subsequent to the above dates and personnel actions: 

*	14 August 1956 – his records reflect Specialist Second Class (E-5)
*	9 Jul 1957 - his records reflect Specialist Third Class (E-4 pay equivalent)
*	1 June 1959 - his records reflect Specialist Fourth Class (E-4 pay equivalent)
*	15 January 1960 – his records reflect Specialist Fifth Class (E-5 pay equivalent)
*	15 October 1961 – he entered on active duty as a Specialist Fifth Class  
*	23 April 1962 – his records reflect Sergeant (E-5 pay equivalent) 
*	9 August 1962 – he was released from active duty as a Sergeant 

6.  A review of the applicant’s DD Form 4 (Enlistment Record) reflects in section 32 
(Prior Service) that when the applicant was discharged for immediate reenlistment on 
12 June 1956, he was a Specialist First Class.  During this period, a Specialist First 
Class was an E-6.  On 13 Jun 1956, the applicant reenlisted and served until                                  
12 June 1959 when he was discharged as a Specialist Fourth Class.  During this period, 
a Specialist Fourth Class was an E-4.  

7.  The applicant’s records are void of any promotion or reduction orders.  Documents 
reflective of the service end date indicated on the submitted DD Form 149                                 
(19 July 1996) is not supported with submitted or available evidence. 

8.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 dated 9 August 1962 item 32 (Remarks) reflects that 
he was released from active duty at the rank of Sergeant (E-5) with a 23 April 1962 date 
of rank.  

9.  Army Regulation (AR) 140-158 (Army Reserve Enlisted Personnel Promotions and 
Reductions) states that promotion of enlisted personnel will be announced on orders of 
the headquarters of the promotion authority.  Required entries will be made in the 
service record and the other pertinent records.  Promotion orders and service record 
entries will cite the specific paragraph and subparagraph of the regulations under which 
authority the promotion was effected, and the effective date of the promotion, which will 
be the date of the order announcing the promotion unless a future date is provided in 
the order.

10.  AR 15-185 (ABCMR) paragraph 2-9 states 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.


BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents and 
evidence on the records.  The Board considered the applicant’s statement, his record of 
service to include National Guard and Active Duty service, the evidence of rank in his 
service record, the absence of promotion or reduction orders and the rank recorded on 
the applicant’s DD Form 214.  Based upon a preponderance of evidence, the Board 
determined that the rank reflected on the applicant’s DD Form 214 was not in error or 
unjust.

2.  After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that 
relief was not warranted.
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.


ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S):

Not Applicable




REFERENCES:

1.  Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military 
records must be filed within three 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 three-year statute of 
limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
2.  Army Regulation (AR) 140-158 (Army Reserve Enlisted Personnel Promotions and 
Reductions) states that promotion of enlisted personnel will be announced on orders of 
the headquarters of the promotion authority.  Required entries will be made in the 
service record and the other pertinent records.  Promotion orders and service record 
entries will cite the specific paragraph and subparagraph of the regulations under which 
authority the promotion was effected, and the effective date of the promotion, which will 
be the date of the order announcing the promotion unless a future date is provided in 
the order.

3.  AR 15-185 (ABCMR) paragraph 2-9 states 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.


ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20180002804

2

1