Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003513
Original file (20090003513.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  28 May 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090003513 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show that he retired in the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class/E-7.

2.  The applicant states that he was retired in the rank and pay grade of staff sergeant/E-6; however, the daughter of his former commander found orders in her father's belongings which show that he was selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-7 on 5 December 1969.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his retirement orders and a copy of Change Number 3 to Circular Number 624-3 (Promotions, Demotions, and Reductions), issued by Headquarters, United States Army, Hawaii, on 24 December 1969.

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 was born on 3 October 1933 and enlisted on 27 May 1952.  He remained on active duty as a light weapons infantryman through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 29 March 1967.

3.  He was transferred to Hawaii on 26 July 1967 and on 5 December 1969, he was recommended for placement on the promotion standing list for promotion to the pay grade of E-7.  He had attained 795.7 points, which placed him in the 11th position overall on the standing list and second in his selected primary military occupational specialty (MOS).

4.  He departed Hawaii on 1 May 1970 and was transferred to Fort Sam Houston, Texas, for duty as an operations sergeant.  His records show that on 8 October 1971, a promotion packet was forwarded to the Department of the Army Centralized Selection Board.

5.  On 28 January 1972, the applicant submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement to be effective 1 July 1972.  He was serving in the pay grade of E-6 at the time.

6.  On 30 June 1972, he was honorably released from active duty and was transferred to the Retired List in the pay grade of E-6 effective 1 July 1972.  He had served 20 years and 5 days of total active service.

7.  The copy of Change Number 3 to Circular Number 624-3, issued by Headquarters, United States Army, Hawaii, on 24 December 1969 provided by the applicant, which the applicant asserts is his promotion order to the pay grade of E-7, is not a promotion order, but simply a change to the promotion standing list which indicates that the applicant was integrated on the standing list effective 5 December 1969.

8.  Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System) serves as the authority for enlisted promotions.  It provides that a Department of the Army centralized promotion system has been in effect for promotion of enlisted personnel since 1 January 1969 for E-9, 1 March 1969 for E-8, and 1 June 1970 for E-7.  It was during these periods that boards convened at Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA), to select and recommend enlisted Soldiers for promotion to E-7, E-8, and E-9.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that he was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 5 December 1969 has been carefully considered.
2.  The document submitted by the applicant is simply a change to a promotion standing list indicating that the applicant had been added to the standing list effective 5 December 1969.

3.  During the period in question, local commands maintained their own promotion standing lists for each grade and promotions were made from the standing list when vacancies occurred in a specific MOS.  However, 6 months after the applicant attained promotion list standing, the Army changed to a Centralized Promotion System and all selections for promotions of senior noncommissioned officers were made at the HQDA level.  Inasmuch as there is no evidence of his ever being selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-7, there appears to be no basis to grant his request.

4.  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

____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 that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      ___________X______________
                 CHAIRPERSON
      
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.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090003513



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090003513



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025465

    Original file (20100025465.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He does not know why he was not promoted. His records show he was considered for promotion to CW3 by the 24 September 1965, 12 August 1966, and 21 April 1967 promotion selection boards, but he was not selected. It states commissioned and warrant officers were recommended for promotion by their commanders, and were selected by centralized (service wide) promotion selection boards who made promotion determinations based upon the officers' promotion records.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016939

    Original file (20140016939.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show that he was retired in the pay grade of E-8. He goes on to state that had he known he was promoted to the pay grade of E-8 he would have extended to serve the 2-year lock-in. It is apparent based on the evidence submitted by the applicant that he was made aware of his selection to the pay grade of E-8 while he was in Vietnam because he submitted his declination for promotion and his request for voluntary retirement while still in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120009970

    Original file (20120009970.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 635-5 prescribes the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army. It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement or discharge. HQDA will determine the needs of the Army by grade and MOS.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089865C070403

    Original file (2003089865C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was not recommended for promotion by that promotion board. Prior to the time the centralized promotion system went into effect for promotion to E-7 on 1 June 1970, individuals could have been recommended for promotion by the unit commander in any awarded MOS or in an MOS in which the soldier was fully qualified for the award of. The evidence provided by the applicant shows that he was erroneously recommended for promotion in MOS 64B, even though a promotion board recommended him for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081874C070215

    Original file (2002081874C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    He states that if he were physically able at the time of his disability processing, he would have submitted a request for a change to his retired rank and pay grade. The evidence or record shows that the applicant was selected for promotion to SFC/E-7 by a properly constituted Department of the Army promotion selection board prior to his disability processing. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing the rank and pay grade of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008006

    Original file (20130008006.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 20130003366

    Original file (20130003366.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 4 October 1984, by letter, the applicant was notified that HQDA conducted a comprehensive review of his record during a recent DA Selection Board for potential denial of continued service under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP). Based on this review, HQDA recommended the applicant be denied continued active service. On 15 July 1985, he was honorably discharged in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 16-5 by reason of a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100020072

    Original file (20100020072.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his records to show he was laterally appointed/promoted to command sergeant major (CSM)/pay grade E-9. The applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows in: a. item 2 (Grade) - "SGM E9"; b. item 3 (Date of Rank) - "23 Nov 66" (i.e., 23 November 1966); c. item 22 (Military Occupational Specialties [MOS]) he was awarded primary MOS 13Z5O and secondary MOS 15E5O (Pershing Missile Crewman) on 23 November 1966; d. item 33 (Appointments and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082134C070215

    Original file (2002082134C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    PROCEEDINGS BOARD DATE: 12 June 2003 DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002082134 The applicant requests, in effect, that his retirement orders, Special Orders Number 103, dated 24 May 1968, be corrected to show the entry, "(COL)" [colonel] instead of "(LTC)" [lieutenant colonel]. Evidence of record shows the applicant was selected for permanent promotion to colonel in the Regular Army effective 2 January 1968.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005727

    Original file (20090005727.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The FSM was temporarily promoted to SFC/E-7 on 15 March 1961 and the promotion was made permanent effective 2 October 1962. In addition, even if the FSM had been on an E-8 promotion list, because he was not physically qualified to perform his duties he could not have been promoted.