RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  13 December 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070010968 


	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. Mohammed R. Elhaj

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Jeffrey C. Redmann

Chairperson

Mr. John G. Heck

Member

Mr. Qawiy A. Sabree

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 promotion to the grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 effective 2 July 1971, the date he was placed on the permanent disability retirement list.

2.  The applicant states that he was recommended for promotion to SSG/E-6 in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11D (Armor Reconnaissance Specialist); however, he was discharged on 2 July 1971 as a result of a medical board that convened on Fort Carson, Colorado, on 5 April 1971.  He should have been promoted prior to discharge. 

3.  The applicant provides the following additional documentary evidence in support of his application: 

	a.  DD Forms 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), dated 14 April 1969 and 2 July 1971;

	b.  DA Form 3355-R (Promotion Points Worksheet);

	c.  DA Form 8-118 (Medical Board Proceedings), dated 5 April 1971;

	d.  Certificate of Recognition for service during the Cold War;

	e.  Photograph of the applicant with another Soldier, dated 1970; 

	f.  Extract of newspaper article published in the Lancaster Eagle-Gazette, Ohio, dated 18 October 2004, titled: Monument will honor Ohio veterans; 

	g. Extract of newspaper article published in the “This Week Pinkerton," a Community Newspaper, Pickerington, Ohio, dated 25 December 2003, titled: “Vietnam Soldier leaves veterans services board;”

	h.  Letters of commendation, dated 20 June 1971, awarded to the applicant by the Teller County Sheriff, Colorado, and the Mayor, Woodland Park, Colorado;

	i.  Copy of Marshall Identification Badge;

	j.  Character reference letter, dated 7 June 1983;

	k.  Copy of the Spring 2001 “Vet Extra”, a magazine by veterans for veterans;

	l.  Extract of newspaper article published on 11 June 2000 in the Lancaster Eagle-Gazette, Ohio, titled:  Ohio Military Hall of Fame; and

	m.  Portrait/drawing of the applicant, dated 30 August 2006.

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 records show that he initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 February 1951and was honorably discharged on 31 July 1951.  He later reenlisted in the Regular Army on 15 April 1966 for a period of 3 years.  He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded MOS 64B (Heavy Vehicle Driver).  He was assigned to B Troop, 1st Squadron, 9th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry Division, in the Republic of Vietnam.  On 13 May 1967, he sustained a combat injury and following hospitalization and treatment, he was subsequently honorably discharged from the Army on 14 April 1969.

3.  After a short break in service, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army on 30 December 1969 for a period of 3 years in MOS 11D.  He was assigned to D Troop, 1st Squadron, 9th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry Division, in the Republic of Vietnam, on 24 February 1970, where he performed duties of unit Reenlistment NCO. 

4.  The applicant’s records also show that he was medically evacuated to the United States on 23 March 1970.  Following completion of his hospitalization, he was assigned to Fort Carson, Colorado.  On 21 January 1971, he was admitted to Fitzsimmons General Hospital at Fort Carson, Colorado.  

5.  On 28 April 1971, a physical evaluation board (PEB) found the applicant to be physically unfit and subsequently retired him, in the grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5, by reason of physical disability.  He was rated at a combined rating of 50 percent. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time of his medical retirement shows that he completed 5 years and 5 days of creditable military service.

6.  Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows the highest rank he attained as SGT/E-5.  There are no permanent orders in the applicant’s records that show he was promoted to SSG/E-6. 

7.  On an unknown date in 1971, the applicant was recommended for promotion to the grade of SSG/E-6 in MOS 11D.  The DA Form 3355-R was authenticated by the applicant’s commanding officer who remarked that “the applicant has only been with this unit a short time; however, he has displayed a high degree of excellence and professionalism.  His knowledge of military subjects was extensive and he was always willing to increase this knowledge and experience.” However, Part I (Administrative Points) and Part II (Total Points) of this form contained blank entries and neither part was authenticated by the proper official. 

8.  The applicant submitted several articles published in local papers showing his commitment, support, and dedication to veterans.  His untiring efforts in support of the veterans were instrumental in the co-founding of the Ohio Military Hall of Fame.

9.  Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), in effect at the time, prescribed policies and procedures pertaining to career management, classification and reclassification, utilization, reenlistment, testing, evaluation, and promotions of en listed personnel.  Chapter 7 of this regulation governed promotions and reductions in grade of Army enlisted personnel.  

10.  Change Number 28, dated 21 April 1969, to Army Regulation 600-200 introduced a new promotion policy that set Army-wide standards.  With the introduction of the Standardized Promotion Scoring Form, promotion standards were defined in precise, measurable terms.  The intent was to ensure that promotion boards evaluated all individuals using the same standard.  In awarding board interview points, individual board members relied on their own judgment and experience.  An individual who was recommended by a majority of the local board would be awarded a recommended list status if his total board points, when added to his total administrative points exceeded other individuals competing for available grade vacancies.  

11.  Paragraph 7-2 of Army Regulation 600-200, in effect at the time, stated that the authority to promote enlisted personnel to the grades of SGT/E-5 and   SSG/E-6 was delegated to field grade commanders of any organization which is authorized a commander in grade of lieutenant colonel (LTC) or higher.  Commanders of medical facilities were authorized to promote hospitalized personnel.  Medical facility commanders with promotion authority could promote individuals assigned as patients who had an established order of merit recommended list status.  Promotion could not be made earlier than the date the individual completed, without waiver, the normal time in grade and service requirements. 

12.  Chapter 7 also stated, in pertinent part, that an enlisted member must be recommended by, or have concurrence in recommendation from the unit commander.  If the Soldier performed duty under other than the unit commander to which assigned, the recommendation will be indorsed by the unit commander of the unit of attachment, or the unit having administrative responsibility.  Waiver is not granted.  Soldiers recommended for promotion to pay grades E-5 and E-6 must appear for selection board evaluation.  The promotion authority will approve or disapprove the recommendations.  When promotion recommendation and waivers are approved, the custodian of the DA Form 201 (Military Personnel Record Jacket) will complete the DA Form 3355.  Administrative points awarded a Soldier will be determined from his records as they exist prior to the approval of the local report of board proceedings.  The recommended Soldier will then check the form for accuracy and completeness before going before the promotion board.  The approved promotion recommendation, necessary waivers, DA Form 3355, MPRJ, and the DA Form 2 (Personnel Qualification Record) and DA Form 20 [(Enlisted Qualification Record); later became the DA Form 2-1], will be given to the recorder of the promotion board.

13.  Promotion boards will be convened monthly except when no Soldier is recommended for board action.  The promotion (convening) authority has the option of appointing a promotion board composed of commissioned, warrant and noncommissioned officers and specialists or all enlisted members.  The promotion authority will appoint, in writing, a promotion board of at least three voting members and a recorder without vote.  The board may be tasked, as a separate action, to consider Soldiers for removal from a recommended list.  The senior member will preside over the board's operation.  The president will review the board proceedings for accuracy, sign it, and give it to the promotion authority for approval or disapproval.  The promotion authority will either approve the report and authorize the names of recommended Soldiers to be integrated into the recommended list, or disapprove the report and convene an entirely new promotion board, composed of new members.  
14.  Upon completing all promotion actions during the month, a recommended list will be published, listing all Soldiers of the organization who have been selected, but not yet promoted.  Names will be listed by grade in ascending order and descending promotion point score order. The list may be prepared by the promotion authority or may be a consolidation by a higher level authority

15.  Eligibility criteria for promotion of active Army members to grades E-5/E-6 made against promotion point cutoff scores.  HQDA will determine the needs of the Army by grade and MOS. Based on this need, the promotion point cutoff scores for primary and secondary zone promotions to grades E-5 and E-6 are announced authorizing commanders to promote the best qualified soldiers Army-wide in each MOS.  Soldiers will be promoted from current recommended list by three-character MOS.  Promotions will be made on the first calendar day of the month in which they are authorized.  Promotion orders may be published with future effective dates.  Soldiers will be eligible for promotion on the first day of the third month following date of selection.  For example, a Soldier is recommended in January 1980 would become eligible for promotion on 1 April 1980.  Soldiers must complete the service remaining requirements for promotion to grades E-5 and E-6.  The service remaining obligation is 3 months for promotion to E-5 and 12 months for promotion to E-6, computed from the first day of the authorized month of promotion.  Waivers will not be granted.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1. The applicant contends that he should have been medically discharged in the grade of SSG/E-6.

2.  The applicant's service and injuries in the Republic of Vietnam as well as his post-service achievements, actions, and support to veterans were noted in this case. 

3.  However, there is no evidence that the applicant's field grade commander approved the recommendation for the applicant to appear before a promotion board; there is no evidence that the applicant appeared before a promotion board; and there is no evidence that he was recommended for promotion by a promotion board.  Additionally, there are no orders promoting the applicant to the grade of SSG/E-6 and there is no entry on his personnel records that shows he was promoted to SSG/E-6.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant is not entitled to relief.



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__jcr___  __jgh___  __qas___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.




							Jeffrey C. Redmann
______________________
          CHAIRPERSON


INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070010968
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
20071213
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
(DENY)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
131.0900
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.