BOARD DATE: 10 February 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190003058 APPLICANT REQUESTS: correction of his DD Form 214 to reflect Staff Sergeant (SSG)/E-6 rather than Sergeant (SGT)/E-5. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Memorandum for Record (MFR) – Disability Grade Determination * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * DA Form 199 (Informal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings * Order# D039-51 FACTS: 1. The applicant states that his DD Form 214 is incorrect as it does not properly reflect the grade that he was retired as. He is currently receiving Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) pay as a SGT rather than as a SSG, and he believes that this is in direct relation to the rank currently reflected on his DD Form 214. He received his current DD Form 214 while involved in a Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) program when he noted the error. He provided the required supporting documents to his servicing personnel office; however, the documents were never processed. He contests that all personnel systems within the Army reflect him as a SSG. 2. A review of the applicant’s available service records reflects the following on: * 16 April 1999 – he enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG) * 30 October 2002 – he was released from the ARNG * 31 October 2002 – he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) * 1 January 2009 – he was promoted to SSG * 25 November 2011 – he was arrested and charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI); Article 15 proceedings were initiated resulting in the applicant receiving a Field Grade Article 15 * 15 December 2011 – he was reduced in grade to SGT * 6 January 2012 – he received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) in result of the DUI charge that he received on 25 November 2011; filed in his official personnel record on 22 February 2012 * 30 April 2013 – he was arrested and charged with DUI * 23 May 2013 – he received a GOMOR resulting from the DUI charge that he received on 30 April 2013; filed in his official personnel record on 9 July 2013 * 24 June 2014 – a PEB was conducted finding him physically unfit for continued military service * 15 September 2014 (Order# 258-0002) – he was ordered for separation effective 9 November 2014; retired grade SGT * 24 September 2014 (Order# 267-0006) – amended previous order to reflect that his retired grade was SSG * 9 November 2014 – he was released from active duty and placed on the Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL) 3. The applicant provides the following a: a. Memorandum for Record (MFR) – Disability Grade Determination dated 25 August 2014 – reflective of the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) determining that the applicant’s highest grade in which he served satisfactorily for the purpose of computation of disability retirement/separation pay was the grade of SSG. b. DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) dated 9 November 2014 – reflective of his separation from active duty; #18. Remarks states that he was placed on the retired list as a SSG. c. DA Form 199 (Informal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings dated 18 December 2017 – reflective of the PEB finding him to be physically unfit for continued military service; recommended for permanent disability retirement d. Order# D039-51 dated 8 February 2018 – reflective of him being removed from the TDRL and permanently retired at the rank of SSG. 4. See all applicable regulatory guidance below under REFERENCES. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents and evidence in the records. The Board considered the applicant’s statement, his record of service, promotions and reductions, his medical proceedings, transfer to the TDRL and his permanent disability retirement and retirement orders. The Board found that the applicant had been promoted to SSG during his service, was subsequently reduced to SGT, and SGT was the rank at which he was serving at the time of his separation from active duty. There is no evidence that the applicant was again promoted to SSG while on active duty, prior to his separation. The Board considered the determination of the Army Grade Determination Review Board that showed the applicant’s highest grade in which he served satisfactorily for the purpose of computation of disability retirement/separation pay was SSG and the notation in block 18 (Remarks) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 showing his retired rank. The AGDRB determination did not result in a change to the applicant’s rank at the time of separation. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the rank shown in item 4 of 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. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation (AR) 15-80 (Army Grade Determination Review Board and Grade Determinations) states in paragraph 2-5, service in the highest grade normally will be considered unsatisfactory when reversion to a lower grade was caused by non-judicial punishment 2. AR 635-5 (Separation Documents) in effect at the time prescribes the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge and release from control of the active Army. Source documents will consist of the ERB, separation orders, and any other document authorized for filing in the official record. Item 4a, enter the active duty grade or rank at the time of separation. 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 the preponderance of the evidence. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190003058 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1