Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004489
Original file (20070004489.txt) Auto-classification: Denied


RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  11 September 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070004489 


	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Mr. Dean L. Turnbull

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Larry C. Bergquist

Chairperson

Ms. Marla J. N. Troup

Member

Ms. Ernestine I. Fields

Member

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration of the denial of his request to correct his records to change his pay grade from E-6 to E-7.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he has documents that can prove he was paid as a sergeant first class/pay grade E-7.  He has served his country to the best of his ability and should be compensated for his service at pay grade E-7.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his DD Forms 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge); medical records; Letter of Commendation; and Headquarters, 99th Field Artillery Battalion, Special Orders Number 116, dated 25 July 1955.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20060001064, on 15 August 2006.

2.  In its original decision the ABCMR found that the applicant was last promoted to the rank of sergeant first class with a corresponding pay grade of  
E-6 on 3 May 1958 and that was his highest rank and pay grade he held on active duty.  The applicant was never promoted beyond pay grade E-6.  As a result, there was no basis to support granting the requested relief.

3.  The applicant has not provided any new evidence.  However, he submits new arguments which require that his case be reconsidered by the ABCMR.

4.  The copies of the medical records; Letter of Commendation; and Headquarters, 99th Field Artillery Battalion, Special Orders Number 116, dated 25 July 1955, only shows that the applicant held the rank as sergeant first class with corresponding pay grade E-6.  However, these documents do not indicate he was paid in pay grade E-7.

5.  The applicant's military records show he was a sergeant with corresponding pay grade E-5 before he was appointed to the temporary grade of sergeant first class with corresponding pay grade E-6.

6.  Special Regulation 615-360-1 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 13, in effect at the time, provided for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  This paragraph provided, in pertinent part that the grade in which the individual was serving at the time of separation, whether the grade was permanent or temporary, and the date of appointment would be entered in Item 3a (Grade, Rate or Rank) of the DD Form 214.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his pay grade should be changed from E-6 to 
E-7.

2.  However, there is no evidence to support his claim that he was promoted beyond pay grade E-6.  The applicant has failed to provide financial documents to prove he was paid as an E-7.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his records to show he was promoted to pay grade E-7.

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___eif___  ___mjnt__  ___lcb_ _  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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20060001064, dated 15 August 2006.

2.  The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.




_________Larry C. Bergquist________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070004489
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070911
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011284

    Original file (20110011284.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides no additional evidence in support of her application. A promotion is not valid and the promotion order will be revoked if the Soldier is not or was not in a promotable status on the effective date. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. voiding Headquarters, USARC, Orders 09-225-00006L, dated 13 August 2009, and removing these orders from her OMPF and b. restoring the validity of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010178

    Original file (20060010178.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. It also stated, in effect, that the applicant, who was in the rank of sergeant/pay grade E-5 at the time, has been a member of the Army National Guard for approximately 20 years at the time. There are no documents in the applicant’s military records dated after 5 July 1992.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024543

    Original file (20100024543.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests to be reinstated to the rank of sergeant major (SGM)/pay grade E-9 with an effective date of 15 October 2008. The promotion orders were processed on 29 January 2009; therefore, the promotion was erroneous. Furthermore, the applicant was not the first Soldier on the list.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011829

    Original file (20140011829.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show: * he retired in the rank/grade of sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 * he completed additional military occupational specialties (MOS) 2. On 18 March 1969, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for absenting himself from his appointed place of duty in violation of a written order of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024351

    Original file (20100024351.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Headquarters, USARC Orders 09-072-00007, dated 13 March 2009, promoted her to sergeant major in MOS 42A with an effective date of 15 January 2009. In her request she stated a MSG at USARC stated she wasn't the only SGM whose promotion orders were revoked. USARC stated the applicant's promotion board was from 16 - 20 January 2007.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007392

    Original file (20100007392.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record does not support the applicant's request for promotion to SGM/E-9 with back pay to the date he was first denied promotion. Under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-19, the applicant was not eligible for consideration for promotion because he had not completed the SMC upon reaching age 55. The evidence of record shows the applicant was erroneously considered and selected for promotion and not properly removed from the PPRL; however, there is no evidence showing...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110008660

    Original file (20110008660.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that all of his records be corrected to show he retired in the rank title of sergeant first class. The evidence of record shows that this was the rank and grade he held upon his retirement. The applicant has provided no evidence that there is an error in his official record that can be corrected.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016291

    Original file (20090016291.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    This form also shows his rank as Specialist 2 (T) [temporary] with a date of rank of 19 December 1955. A copy of a noncommissioned officer (NCO)/specialist program appointment letter, dated 13 March 1957, states the applicant's personnel records indicated he converted to a specialist status on or about 1 July 1955; however, there was no record of his acceptance or declination of the rank designation. The applicant also states that he does not know what rank a SP5 is.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007639

    Original file (20080007639.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant was promoted to sergeant first class/E-7. There is no evidence of record which shows he was promoted to sergeant first class/E-7 prior to his retirement.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003258

    Original file (20090003258.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that the records of her late husband, the former service member (FSM), be corrected to show that he was a master sergeant (MSG). He was then promoted to sergeant (temporary) on 7 May 1955, to sergeant first class (SFC) (both temporary and permanent) (pay grade E-6) on 21 August 1958, and to SFC (both temporary and permanent) (pay grade E-7) on 27 June 1966. The records conclusively show that the FSM was never promoted to the rank of MSG, pay grade E-8.