Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013353
Original file (20100013353.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		
		BOARD DATE:	  26 October 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100013353 


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 correction of his rank/grade at the time of his separation from specialist four (SP4)/E-4 to sergeant (SGT)/E-5.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, his commander recommended him for promotion while in Vietnam, but was not able to travel to the applicant's location to conduct the ceremony.  He should have received the pay increase with back pay effective when the recommendation memorandum was signed by the commander in accordance with Army policy.

3.  The applicant provides copies of an unsigned memorandum, a DD Form 1725 (Certificate of Appreciation), and his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).

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 he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 18 August 1969 in the rank/grade of private/E-1.  Records show he completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 76V (Equipment Storage Specialist).

3.  His records further show that upon successful completion of basic combat training, he earned an accelerated promotion to the rank/grade of private/E-2 effective 17 October 1969 in accordance with paragraph 7-19b of Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System).

4.  On 20 January 1970, the U.S. Army Quartermaster School Brigade, Fort Lee, VA, published Special Orders Number 13 Extract announcing his promotion to the rank/grade of private first class/E-3 in primary MOS 76V2O effective 20 January 1970.

5.  On 23 January 1970, the U.S. Army Quartermaster School Brigade published Special Orders Number 16 Extract announcing his promotion to the rank/grade of SP4/E-4.

6.  Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows the highest rank/grade he held while serving on active duty was that of SP4/E-4.

7.  His records show he served in the Republic of Vietnam from 31 May 1970 to 23 April 1971 while assigned to Troop Command, U.S. Army Depot Qui Nhon.

8.  On 20 November 1970, Company A, Troop Command, U.S. Army Depot Qui Nhon, published Unit Orders Number 58 announcing the applicant's appointment as an acting noncommissioned officer (NCO) in the rank/grade SGT/E-5.

9.  On 13 February 1971, Headquarters, U.S. Army Depot Qui Nhon, published Assignment Memorandum Number 22 Extract announcing his reassignment from Company A, Troop Command, U.S. Army Depot, to Security Guard Company, Troop Command, U.S. Army Depot, effective 15 February 1971.  The standard name line on these orders shows his rank as SP4.

10.  His records show he was honorably released from active duty on 27 April 1971and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training).  Items 5a and 5b of the DD Form 214 he was issued show the entries "SP4" and "E-4" respectively.

11.  There are no special orders in the applicant's record that show he was promoted to SGT/E-5.

12.  The applicant provides a copy of an unsigned memorandum, dated 5 February 1971, from the commander of Company A, Troop Command, U.S. Army Depot Qui Nhon, to the commander of Troop Command, U.S. Army Depot Qui Nhon, wherein he recommends the applicant be promoted to the rank/grade of SGT/E-5.

13.  He also provides a copy of a DD Form 1725 and a copy of his DD Form 214.

14.  Army Regulation 600-200, 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 that commanders may appoint qualified Soldiers as acting sergeants/E-5 to serve in vacant positions in their units at their present or higher grade and that acting NCO's are not entitled to pay and allowances for such higher grades.  In addition, it stated the promotion of enlisted personnel to grades E-3 through E-9, appointments, grade reductions, and grade restoration were announced in routine orders.  Field grade commanders in the rank of lieutenant colonel or higher could promote to E-5.

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.  There is insufficient evidence to support this contention.

2.  The evidence of record shows that at the time of his separation on 27 April 1971, he held the rank/grade of SP4/E-4.  His record is void of any promotion orders to SGT/E-5 and item 33 of his DA Form 20 does not show an entry for promotion to SGT/E-5.

3.  He provides an unsigned memorandum wherein his commander recommended him for promotion to SGT/E-5.  However, there is no evidence the recommendation was ever submitted or processed.  In addition, promotions of enlisted personnel to grades E-3 through E-9 were announced in routine orders.  His commander merely recommended him for promotion, he was not the promotion authority.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting his request.

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)                                         AR20100013353



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100013353



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029351

    Original file (20100029351.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 July 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100029351 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests reconsideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) decision denying a change to his rank and pay grade to sergeant/pay grade E-5 on his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) with an effective date of 27 April 1971. He was promoted to acting sergeant E-5 by the commander of Company A,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014367

    Original file (20100014367.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 award of the Combat Infantryman Badge. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Combat Infantryman Badge is awarded to infantry officers and to enlisted and warrant officer persons who have an infantry MOS. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence on which to base award of the Combat Infantryman Badge in this case.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014293

    Original file (20110014293.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant states his DD Form 214 should be corrected to document the correct rank and pay grade and military occupational specialty (MOS) and MOS training completed. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows his rank/grade as SP4/E-4 in items 5a and 5b, and his date of rank as 26 August 1966 in item 6 (Date of Rank).

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010796

    Original file (20120010796.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 24 February 1969 in the rank/grade of private/E-1. There are no special orders in the applicant’s record that show he was promoted to SGT/E-5. The evidence of record shows that at the time of separation, 24 February 1971, the applicant held the rank/grade of SP4/E-4.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028075

    Original file (20100028075.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: * his rank/grade as a sergeant (SGT)/E-5 * award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB) 2. On 8 June 1971, Headquarters, 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized) published Special Orders Number 159 ordering his release from active duty effective 11 June 1971. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides for award of the CIB.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019442

    Original file (20080019442.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, it appears the applicant requests, in effect, correction of his separation document to show he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman) and that he was wounded in action and awarded the Purple Heart. A thorough review of the applicant’s military personnel records revealed that there are no orders or other evidence in his records that show he was awarded MOS 11B. While the evidence of record shows that the applicant served in Duty MOS 11B1O...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029103

    Original file (20100029103.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His DD Form 214 shows in: * Items 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and 5b (Pay Grade) the entries "SP4" and "E-4" respectively * Item 6 (Date of Rank) shows the entry "10 May 1971" 14. However, his separation orders listed his rank as a SP4 and his DD Form 214 also listed his rank and grade as a SP4/E-4, effective 10 May 1971. The available evidence is insufficient to correct the applicant's DD Form 214 to show he was promoted to or released from active duty in the rank of SGT/E-5.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000691

    Original file (20090000691.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). In the absence of documentation that shows he was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action and treated for those wounds, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Purple Heart in this case. XXX _________________________ 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002820

    Original file (20110002820.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also shows he was promoted to SP4 on 6 December 1968, the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty and he held this rank until he was reduced to PFC for misconduct on 22 August 1969. The evidence of record also confirms the applicant was granted de facto status during the period he erroneously held the rank of SGT from 5 November 1970 to 22 November 1972. Based on the applicant's erroneous promotion to SGT and lacking evidence to corroborate the applicant's claim he did not...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011516

    Original file (20130011516.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards): a. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, provided that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded to enlisted Soldiers who had completed a qualified period of active duty enlisted service. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 11 August 1970 to 14 February 1972; b. deleting from his DD Form...