RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  21 February 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070014307 


	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:


Ms. Margaret K. Patterson

Chairperson

Ms. Sherri V. Ward

Member

Mr. Jeffrey C. Redmann

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 correction of Item 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and Item 5b (Pay Grade) on his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), from "specialist four (Temporary) [SP4 (T)]/E-4” to "sergeant (SGT)/E-5." 

2.  The applicant states that his rank and pay grade are erroneously listed as SP4/E-4.

3.  The applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, dated 14 June 1968; a copy of his DA Form 137 (Installation Clearance Record), a copy of Certificate of Appreciation, dated 11 June 1968; and a copy of Letter Orders Number           08-1309213 (Discharge from the U.S. Army Reserve), dated 23 August 1972 , in support of his application.

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 record shows that he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 15 September 1966 in the grade of private/E-1.  He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11C (Indirect Infantry Fire Crewman).  He was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training) on 14 June 1968.

3.  The applicant’s DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) is not available for review with this case.

4.  The applicant’s record further shows that upon successful completion of basic combat training, he earned an accelerated promotion to the rank of private/E-2, 
effective 25 November 1966 in accordance with paragraph 7-19b of Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), accelerated advancement. 

5.  The applicant’s promotion orders to private first class (PFC)/E-3 are not available for review with this case.

6.  Headquarters, 1st Battalion, 12th Infantry, 4th Infantry Division, Unit Orders Number 4, dated 19 January 1968 show that the applicant was appointed to the “Temporary” rank and grade of SP4/E-4 in accordance with paragraph 7-13 of Army Regulation 600-200. 

7.  Headquarters, U.S. Army Personnel Center, Special Orders Number 166, dated 14 June 1968; show the applicant was released from active duty and reassigned to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training), effective 14 June 1968.  The standard name line on the Special Orders listed the applicant’s rank and grade as “SP4/E-4.”

8.  The applicant submitted a copy of his Installation Clearance Record, dated 11 June 1968, that shows his rank and grade as SGT/E-5.  He also submitted a copy of a Certificate of Appreciation, dated 11 June 1968, that shows his rank as SGT.  

9.  Office of the Adjutant General, U.S. Army Administration Center, St. Louis, Missouri, Letter Orders Number 08-1309213, dated 23 August 1972, relieved the applicant from his obligation in the Standby Reserve of the U.S. Army Control Group and honorably discharged him effective 14 September 1972.  The standard name line on the Letter Orders listed the applicant’s grade as “SGT.”

10.  There are no Special Orders in the applicant’s record that show he was promoted to SGT/E-5.

11.  Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), in effect at the time, prescribed policies, responsibilities, and procedures pertaining to career management of Army enlisted personnel.  Chapter 7 contained Army-wide promotion policy and procedures.  It stated, in pertinent part, that the criteria for promotion to E-5 were 36 months “Time in Service” and 8 months “Time in Grade” as an E-4.  The waiverable criteria for promotion to E-5 were 24 months “Time in Service” and 4 months “Time in Grade.”  Promotion of enlisted personnel to grade E-3 through E-9, appointments, grade reductions, and grade restoration were announced in routine orders.  Unit orders were issued for promotions to grade E-3 and E-4.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his rank and grade should be corrected to show SGT/E-5 instead of SP4/E-4.

2.  Evidence of record shows that the highest rank the applicant attained during his military service was SP4 (T)/E-4.  It is not clear why his Installation Clearance Record or his Certificate of Appreciation show SGT/E-5.  His record does not contain any Special Orders that show he was promoted to SGT/E-5 and there is no evidence that shows he was promoted to SGT/E-5.  Evidence of record further shows that the applicant did not attain the minimum number of months required to be promoted to SGT/E-5, even with a waiver. 

3.  There is no evidence in the available records nor did the applicant provide documentation to substantiate his SGT/E-5 grade.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant did not submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to relief. 

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__mkp___  __svw___  __jcr___  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.



						Margaret K. Patterson
______________________
          CHAIRPERSON


INDEX

CASE ID
AR
SUFFIX

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

BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.