RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 26 February 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070014916
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 |
| |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos | |Analyst |
The following members, a quorum, were present:
| |Ms. Linda D. Simmons | |Chairperson |
| |Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas | |Member |
| |Mr. John G. Heck | |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, in effect, that his records be corrected to
show he was promoted to Staff Sergeant (SSG), E-6.
2. The applicant states that he was promoted but pay was never received.
3. The applicant provides a partial Enlisted Promotion List, dated 15 June
1967.
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. After having had prior service in the U. S. Navy, the applicant
enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 January 1960. He was honorably
discharged on 23 January 1962 and immediately reenlisted on 24 January 1962
for 6 years.
3. The applicant was promoted to Specialist Five (SP5), E-5 on 16 April
1965.
4. The applicant provided a partial Enlisted Promotion List, dated 15 June
1967, that announced personnel selected for promotion by the Tuy Hoa Sub
Area Command (Vietnam) Promotion Board. The List noted that, except for
those instances where the command had no vacancy in a particular military
occupational specialty (MOS) and grade, promotions would be made by list
sequence. This List shows the applicant was selected for promotion in MOS
55E.
5. Orders dated 4 August 1967 reassigned the applicant to the States. The
applicant’s rank and grade are listed as SP5, E-5 on the standard name
line.
6. The applicant was honorably discharged on 23 January 1968. His DD Form
214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for
the period ending 23 January 1968 is not available.
7. The applicant’s discharge orders, dated 17 January 1968, show his rank
and grade as SP5, E-5 in the standard name line. On 23 January 1968, the
applicant completed a DA Form 3082-R (Statement of Medical Condition). On
this form, he listed his rank as SP5.
8. Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), chapter
7 at the time, stated that individuals could be recommended for promotion
by the unit commander only against authorized position vacancies existing
or projected for a 2-month period within the command as announced by the
promoting authority. An individual who was next line for promotion to fill
the vacancy and for whom a promotion quota was received would be promoted
by the losing commander up to the date of arrival at the new duty station
even though intransit.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant provided evidence to show he was selected for promotion
to SSG by a promotion board; however, there is no evidence of record and he
provided none to show that that he was actually promoted against an
authorized vacancy after a promotion quota was received.
2. The applicant’s August 1967 orders transferring him to the States
listed his rank as SP5. His discharge orders listed his rank as SP5.
There is insufficient evidence to show he was promoted to SSG prior to his
discharge in January 1968.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__lds___ __lmd___ __jgh___ 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.
__Linda D. Simmons____
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR20070014916 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON | |
|DATE BOARDED |20080226 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
|DISCHARGE REASON | |
|BOARD DECISION |DENY |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY |Ms. Mitrano |
|ISSUES 1. |131.00 |
|2. | |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
-----------------------
[pic]
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070014916
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 26 February 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070014916 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. The applicant provided evidence to show he was selected for promotion to SSG by a promotion board; however, there is no evidence of record and he provided none to show that that he was actually promoted against an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008006
The applicant requests correction of his military records to show he was promoted to the grade of E-7 or advancement on the Retired List to the grade of E-7. He was promoted to E-6 on 8 May 1967. However, he was not promoted to E-6 until 8 May 1967.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003641
The applicant requests correction of his military service records to show he was promoted to the rank of sergeant first class (SFC). The applicant states he was denied promotion to staff sergeant (SSG) while assigned in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 1965 to 1966. Centralized promotion boards (for promotion consideration to grades E-7, E-8 and E-9) would select the best qualified Soldier in each MOS for promotion.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016567
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) records to show: * His active Reserve service * Promotion to Staff Sergeant (SSG)/E-6 * Change in his military occupational specialty (MOS) 2. His record contains a Promotion Recommendation and Board Report Form dated 8 August 1977 which listed his current rank as SP5 and shows he was recommended for promotion to SSG. The evidence of record shows he held no military status from 26 March 1971 to 3 October 1972 and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120009976
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant did not provide any evidence. However, his records contain two DA Forms 24 (Service Record) and a DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), as follows: a. DA Form 24 covering the period 10 September 1962 to 2 September 1965 shows in Section 1 - Appointments, Promotions or Reduction the following grades and effective dates: * private (PVT)/E-1, 10 September 1962 * private (PVT)/E-2,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017923
There are no orders or other evidence authorizing award of this decoration to the applicant. The board would consist of both officers and enlisted appointed by the appropriate promotion authority to select individuals for promotion to pay grades E-5 through E-9. A list of the individuals recommended by the board and selected by the promotion authority, in the order they were to be promoted, would be published.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018474
c. In order to be eligible for temporary appointment to pay grade E-4, a Soldier must have completed 6 months in pay grade E-3, be in an appointable status, and hold and be serving in the MOS in which the appointments are authorized. The permanent appointment of Regular Army Soldiers in the grade in which serving would become automatic for pay grade E-4 at 12 months? It stated that items 5a and 5b would show the active duty rank and pay grade at the time of the Soldier's separation, taken...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011513C070208
He has orders dated 23 May 1969 promoting him to E-5. He was reviewed by a promotion board and was recommended for promotion to SGT, E-5 by a majority of the board's membership. The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010445
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 November 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090010445 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The evidence of record shows that at the time of retirement, on 28 February 1975, the applicant held the rank of SP7/E-7. In the absence of such orders and/or the authority for this promotion, there is insufficient evidence to grant the applicant the requested relief.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070007203
The applicant's records show his rank, date of rank, and grade history as follows: a. Corporal (CPL), permanent grade (P), pay grade E-4 with a date of rank of 31 August 1950, in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army Enlistment Program); b. On 23 October 1967, the applicant signed a statement declining his recommendation for promotion to pay grade E-7 under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-200 and stated that he was retiring and did not wish to have a two-year service...