IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  1 September 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110003698 


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 records to show he was promoted to sergeant (SGT)/pay grade E-5.

2.  The applicant states he appeared before the promotion board at Fort Bragg, NC, and was recommended for promotion to E-5.  Shortly thereafter, he was transferred to Fort Stewart, GA, and his records were lost.  By the time they found his records, he was told that it was too late to promote him.  He adds that, after all these years, correcting his separation document only means something to him and is the right thing for the Army to do.

3.  The applicant provides copies of five documents from his promotion packet and his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

1.  Counsel requests, in effect, correction of the applicant's records to show he was promoted to SGT (E-5).

2.  Counsel, in effect, defers to the applicant.

3.  Counsel provides no additional documentary evidence in support of the 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 enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years on 1 July 1981.  He was awarded military occupational specialty 11C (Indirect Fire Infantryman).

3.  The applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows in:

   a.  item 18 (Appointments and Reductions) the highest grade he attained was specialist four (SP4) [pay grade E-4] with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 July 1983; and

   b.  item 38 (Record of Assignments) he was:

       (1)  assigned to Company C, 2nd Battalion (Airborne), 504th Infantry, Fort Bragg, NC, from 15 February 1982 through 29 March 1984;

       (2)  en route to Fort Stewart, GA, from 30 March through 25 April 1984; and

       (3)  assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 2nd Battalion, 21st Infantry, Fort Stewart, GA, from 26 April 1984 through 29 June 1985.

4.  Headquarters, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC, Orders 122-124, dated 30 June 1983, promoted the applicant to SP4 [E-4] effective and with a DOR of
1 July 1983.

5.  Headquarters, 2nd Battalion (Airborne), 504th Infantry, Fort Bragg, NC, letter and 1st Endorsement, dated 13 March 1984, subject:  Report of Promotion Board Proceedings for Promotion to Pay Grades E-5 and E-6, show the applicant was recommended for promotion to E-5  in the primary zone with a total of
827 promotion points.
6.  Headquarters, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC, Orders 57-51, dated 23 March 1984, and 1st Endorsement to the Basic Orders, dated 24 April 1984, assigned the applicant to Headquarters and Headquarters Company,
2nd Battalion, 21st Infantry, Fort Stewart, GA, on 24 April 1984.

   a.  The endorsement to the orders shows the applicant's rank was "SP4."

   b.  Paragraph 4 shows, "SM [Service Member] is not on promotion standing list in grade _____."

7.  Headquarters, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC, memorandum, dated 13 July 1984, subject:  Promotion Statement in Lieu of Recommended Promotion List, shows the assistant adjutant notified the Commander, 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized), that the applicant was boarded in March 1984 for promotion to E-5 with a total score of 827 promotion points and that he was reassigned prior to being integrated into the command's Promotion Recommended List.

8.  Two DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Actions), dated 17 October 1984, show the commander certified that the applicant completed the required on-the- job experience for promotion to the next higher grade (i.e., E-5) and was given a commander's evaluation of 145 points.

9.  A DA Form 3355 (Promotion Point Worksheet) - Initial "Reconstruction Packet," March 1984, shows the applicant was recommended for promotion to grade E-5 and granted a total of 724 promotion points.  The DA Form 3355 was signed by the enlisted promotion clerk in November 1984.

10.  Headquarters, 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized), Fort Stewart, GA, memorandum, dated 6 December 1984, requested authority for integration of the applicant into the command's local E-5 Recommended Standing List.

11.  On 2 January 1984 [sic], the Chief, Enlisted Promotions Section, U.S. Army Military Personnel Center, Alexandria, VA, approved the request to integrate the applicant into the command's local E-5 Recommended Standing List, as an exception to policy.

   a.  The local command was instructed to review the applicant's promotion point worksheets for administrative corrections and granted approval for any adjustment of promotion points.

   b.  The command was also directed to review all announced Department of the Army promotion point cut-off scores and, if the applicant's score exceeded a promotion point cut-off score, it was granted authority to promote the applicant.
12.  A DA Form 3355 - Recomputation, May 1984, shows the applicant was recommended for promotion to grade E-5 and granted a total of 738 promotion points.  The DA Form 3355 was signed by the enlisted promotion clerk in January 1985.

13.  A DA Form 3355 - Recomputation, November 1984, shows the applicant was recommended for promotion to grade E-5 and granted a total of
761 promotion points.  The DA Form 3355 was signed by the enlisted promotion clerk in January 1985.

14.  Headquarters, 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized), Fort Stewart, GA, Orders 38-31, dated 25 February 1985, as amended by Orders 77-56, dated 22 April 1985, reassigned the applicant to the Southeastern U.S. Army Garrison Separation Transfer Point, Fort Stewart, GA, for release from active duty (REFRAD) on 30 June 1985.  The standard name line of the orders show the applicant's rank was "SP4."

15.  A DD Form 214 shows the applicant entered active duty this period on
1 July 1981, he was honorably REFRAD on 30 June 1985 based upon expiration of term of service, and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement).  He completed 4 years of net active service.

   a.  It shows in:

* item 4a (Grade, Rate or Rank) - "SP4"
* item 4b (Pay Grade) - "E-4"
* item 12 (Record of Service), block h (Effective Date of Pay Grade) - "83 07 01" (i.e., 1 July 1983).  

   b.  Item 21 (Signature of Member Being Separated) shows the applicant placed his signature on the document.

16.  There are no orders or other evidence in the applicant's military personnel records that shows he was promoted to pay grade E-5.

17.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations - Separation Documents), in effect at the time of the applicant's separation from active duty, prescribed policies and procedures regarding separation documents.  It also established standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.

   a.  Chapter 2 contains guidance on the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It states, in pertinent part, that the source documents for entering information on the DD Form 214 will be the Personnel Qualification Record, Officer Record Brief, enlistment/ reenlistment documents, personnel finance records, discharge documents, separation orders, Military Personnel Records Jacket, or any other document authorized for filing in the Official Military Personnel File.

   b.  Section II (Preparation of DD Form 214) contains item-by-item instructions for completing the DD Form 214. The instructions for:

       (1)  item 4 state enter active duty grade of rank and pay grade at time of separation; and

       (2)  item 12 state use extreme care in completing this block since post-service benefits, final pay, retirement credit, etc. are based upon the information contained herein.  Block h states enter the effective date of promotion to pay grade.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show he was promoted to pay grade E-5 because he was recommended for promotion, but when he was reassigned his records were lost and, as a result, he was not promoted.

2.  Records show the applicant was promoted to SP4/E-4 effective and with a DOR of 1 July 1983.

3.  Records show the applicant was recommended for promotion to grade E-5 in March 1984 and reassigned prior to being integrated into the local command's
E-5 Recommended Standing List.

   a.  In December 1984, the applicant's new command requested authority to integrate the applicant into its E-5 Recommended Standing List.

       (1)  In January 1985, authority was granted to integrate the applicant into the E-5 Recommended Standing List, to review his promotion point worksheets for administrative corrections, and to make any adjustment of promotion points.  

       (2)  Authority was also granted to review all announced Department of the Army promotion point cut-off scores and promote the applicant, if his score exceeded a promotion point cut-off score during the period in question.

   b.  Records show the applicant's promotion points were recomputed twice in January 1985 (i.e., as of May 1984 and November 1984).
   c.  There is no evidence of record to show the applicant was promoted to the grade of E-5 during the period of service under review.

4.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was REFRAD on 30 June 1985 in the rank of SP4/E-4 with a DOR of 1 July 1983.  Therefore, records confirm the rank, pay grade, and effective date shown on the applicant's DD Form 214 are correct and the applicant is not entitled to correction of his records.

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)                                         AR20110003698



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110003698



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1