Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029103
Original file (20100029103.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  21 June 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100029103 


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, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show he was promoted to the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5. 

2.  The applicant states he has documentation, dated 11 June 1971, that shows he was recommended for promotion to SGT/E-5.  Shortly after this letter was submitted, he appeared before a review board and he was told his promotion was approved.  He never received that pay grade.  

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214, DD Form 215 (Correction to 
DD Form 214), and a Promotion Recommendation.

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 he was inducted into the Army of the United States in pay grade E-1 on 14 August 1970.  He completed the training requirements and he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).  He was advanced to E-2 on 14 December 1970.

3.  He served in Vietnam from 14 February 1971 to 19 March 1972.  He was assigned to the 5th Battalion, 46th Infantry, 196th Light Infantry Brigade, 23rd Infantry Division (Americal).

4.  On 3 March 1971, shortly after his arrival in Vietnam, Headquarters, 23rd Infantry Division (Americal) published Special Orders Number 62 appointing him to private first class (PFC)/E-3 effective 16 February 1971.

5.  On 9 April 1971, Headquarters, 23rd Infantry Division, published General Orders Number 4100 awarding him the Purple Heart.  His rank is listed as a "PFC" on these orders. 

6.  On 7 May 1971, he was issued a certificate of appreciation in recognition of outstanding service during combat operations in Vietnam from 10 March to 
7 May 1971.  The certificate listed his rank as a "PFC."  

7.  On 23 January 1972, Headquarters, 196th Infantry Brigade, published Special Orders Number 23 assigning him to the U.S. Army Transition Station, Fort Lewis, WA for the purpose of separation processing, effective 18 March 1972.  These orders listed his rank as a "PFC." 

8.  His DA Form 137 (Installation Clearance Record), which was initiated upon his departure from Vietnam on or about 17 March 1972, also listed his rank as a "PFC." 

9.  On 19 March 1972, Headquarters, U.S. Army Personnel Center, Fort Lewis, WA, published Special Orders Number 79 showing he was separated in the rank of specialist four/SP4.

10.  On 20 March 1972, he underwent a separation physical at Fort Lewis, WA.  His Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination) listed his rank as a "SP4." 

11.  Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows the entry PFC/E-3 as the highest rank/grade he held. 

12.  His service records do not contain official orders promoting him to SP4/E-4 or SGT/E-5. 

13.  On 20 March 1972, he was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group to complete his remaining obligation.  He completed 1 year, 7 months, and 7 days of creditable active service.  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.  He submitted a Promotion Recommendation, dated 11 June 19xx, from sergeant first class (SFC) LEF, Custodian, to the company commander through the Assistant Chief of Staff (ACofS), G-1.  

	a.  The Promotion Recommendation appears to recommend that the applicant be promoted from pay grade E-4 to pay grade E-5.  The recommendation also stated that the applicant demonstrated a high degree of skill and knowledge in the operation of an Open Mess warehouse.  He was filling the pay grade or slot of an E-7.  Through his diligent efforts, he had increased ……in the warehouse and the individual clubs.  The quality of his work was of the highest standards.  The SFC highly recommended him for promotion. 

	b.  The memorandum had a pre-prepared undated endorsement with the signature block of lieutenant colonel WTR, the ACofS and the entry "recommend approval."

15.  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 promotion of enlisted personnel to grade E-5 through E-9, appointments, grade reductions, and grade restoration were announced in orders.  

16.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  Chapter 2 of the regulation in effect at the time contains guidance on the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It states, in pertinent part, that items 5a and 5b will show the 
active duty rank and pay grade at time of the Soldier's separation; the rank is taken from the Soldier’s promotion/reduction orders; and item 6 shows the date of rank.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  With respect to his SP4/E-4 rank/grade, his reassignments orders from Vietnam and clearance papers show he departed Vietnam in the rank of PFC.  His certificate of appreciation dated 7 May 1971 also showed his rank as that of a PFC.  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.  Although his record is void of any orders promoting him to SP4, the entry regarding his rank/grade on his DD Form 214 is presumed to be correct. 

2.  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. The recommendation that the applicant provided for promotion to SGT/E-5 is just that, a recommendation.  His service records do not contain official orders promoting him to SGT/E-5, his DA Form 20 shows the highest rank/grade he attained was PFC/E-3, and his separation orders listed his rank as a SP4.  In the absence of documentary evidence confirming he was promoted/appointed to SGT/E-5 the evidence is insufficient to correct his DD Form 214. 

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)                                         AR20100029103



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100029103



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2009 | 20090018797

    Original file (20090018797.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, dated 8 February 1972; copies of Special Orders Number 87, 136, and 229, issued by Headquarters, 3d Brigade (Separate), 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile), on 5 July 1971, 23 August 1971, and 24 November 1971, respectively; a copy of the 229th Assault Helicopter Battalion Promotion Standing List, dated 30 November 1971; a copy of Special Orders Number 39, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Personnel Center, Fort Lewis, WA, on 8 February 1972;...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120017166

    Original file (20120017166.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Having prior active service, the applicant's records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 June 1970 in the rank of PFC and he held MOS's 13A and 13E. There are no orders in his records that show he ever served as a CPL/E-4 or was ever promoted to SGT/E-5. There is no evidence in his record that shows he went before a promotion board and was recommended for promotion to SGT/E-5.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007220

    Original file (20140007220.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A chronological record of medical care, dated 27 December 1971, showing he was hospitalized from 27 December 1971 to 8 September 1972. The evidence of record shows that at the time of his retirement on 22 November 1972, the applicant held the rank/grade of PFC/E-3. Notwithstanding the medical document and DA Form 2496 he provides (both listing his rank as SP4), promotions of enlisted personnel were announced in orders.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003279

    Original file (20140003279.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His records contain Special Orders Number 14, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Personnel Center, Fort Lewis, WA, dated 14 January 1972, which show he was relieved from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Annual Training) effective 15 January 1972. The DD Form 214 he was issued lists his rank/grade as SP4/E-4 and his date of rank as 15 September 1970. The available evidence is insufficient to correct the applicant's DD Form 214 to show he was promoted...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110024984

    Original file (20110024984.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    A DD Form 1407 (Dependent Medical Care and DD Form 1173 Statement), dated 24 January 1972, shows his rank as E-4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence shows he was appointed to the rank/grade of SP4/E-4 effective 4 May 1971, more than 8 months prior to his release from active duty. Therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show his rank/grade as SP4/E-4.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001885

    Original file (20090001885.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, correction to item 5a (Grade, Rate, or Rank) and item 5b (Pay Grade) of 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. 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 his separation on 29 November 1968, the applicant held the rank/grade of SP4/E-4.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016308

    Original file (20080016308.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 the applicant served in Korea from on or about 28 May 1969 to on or about 25 November 1969; therefore, he served a qualifying period for award of the Korea Defense Service Medal and is entitled to correction of his records to show this award. The evidence of record shows the applicant was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080003198

    Original file (20080003198.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    There are no Special Orders in the applicant’s record that show he was promoted to SGT/E-5. The evidence of record further shows that, during his service in the Republic of Vietnam, the applicant was issued an order awarding him an MOS that indicates he was appointed in a higher grade. 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 | CY2013 | 20130015772

    Original file (20130015772.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests correction of his records to show he was promoted to the rank of sergeant (SGT)/pay grade E-5. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by deleting from his DD Form 214 the entry in: * item 5a and adding "SGT" * item 5b and adding "E-5" * item 6 and adding "13 December 1971" * item 23a and adding...