IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  13 November 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120009970 


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 retroactive promotion to staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 and promotion consideration for sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 with entitlement to retroactive pay.

2.  The applicant states, in effect:

* an egregious mistake was made and he was removed from the promotion list without his consent
* had he been properly promoted to SSG/E-6 he would have been eligible to compete for promotion to SFC/E-7
* he does not want a ceremony; he simply wants his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) corrected to show the rank of SSG or SFC

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Form 214
* DA Form 2A (Personnel Qualification Record - Part I)
* DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification record - Part II)
* Memorandum, Subject: Outprocessing without Promotion Standing List

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

The applicant listed the name and address of his counsel.  However, counsel does not make a statement or provide any additional evidence.
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.  Having had prior service from 23 May 1966 to 3 May 1969 and 30 September 1969 to 29 September 1972, the applicant's records show he enlisted in the Regular Army in the rank/grade of private/E-2 on 13 April 1977 and he held military occupational specialty (MOS) 76P (Stock Control and Accounting Specialist).

3.  He served through multiple reenlistments, in a variety of stateside or overseas assignments, in MOS 88N (Movement Specialist) and he was promoted to specialist four/E-4 on 24 November 1977.

4.  On 28 July 1981, the 178th Personnel Service Company, Germany, published Orders 176-4 promoting him to specialist five (SP5)/E-5 (which later became SGT/E-5), effective 1 August 1981, with a date of rank of 2 July 1981.  

5.  On 4 June 1990, he submitted an application for retirement.  He indicated that his current grade was SGT/E-5 and the highest rank that he served in was that of SGT.

6.  He was honorably retired on 31 May 1991 and placed on the Retired List in his retired rank/grade of SGT/E-5 on 1 June 1991.  His DD Form 214 shows in:

* Items 4a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and 4b (Pay Grade) - "SGT" and "E-5"
* Item 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade) - "81  08  01"

7.  His records do not contain promotion orders confirming his promotion to SSG/E-6. 



8.  He submitted:

	a.  A letter, dated 31 August 1984, authored by an Assistant Adjutant General, at Headquarters, I Corps and Fort Lewis, and addressed to the Commander, Military District of Washington stating the applicant departed Fort Lewis prior to being integrated onto the promotion list.  He appeared before a promotion board in August 1984 and he had 834 total points.

	b.  A copy of his DA Form 2A, dated 7 January 1988, that show he was a promotable SGT as of June 1986.  The total number of promotion points is not listed. 

9.  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.  In establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  The DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier’s most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement or discharge.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted promotion and Reductions) prescribes the policies and procedures governing promotion and reduction of Army enlisted personnel.  It provides for managing semi-centralized boards and governs the SGT and SSG promotion system for Active Army.  It states that field-grade commanders in units authorized a commander in the grade of lieutenant colonel (LTC) or higher have promotion authority to the grades of SGT and SSG; however, the promotion branch at the servicing personnel center maintains the recommended list and issues the orders.  Promotions to SGT and SSG are executed in a semi-centralized manner.  Field operations will handle board appearance, promotion point calculation, promotion list maintenance, and the final execution of the promotion, occurs in the field in a decentralized manner.  Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) operations will handle promotion cutoff scores and the monthly SGT/SSG promotion selection by-name list, which are determined and announced monthly.  HQDA will determine the needs of the Army by grade and MOS.  Promotion to SGT and SSG is announced in permanent orders. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was promoted to SGT/E-5 on 1 August 1981.  He held this rank/grade until he retired on 31 May 1991.  There are no orders in his service records and he provides none to show he was promoted to SSG/E-6.

2.  Being in a promotable status for the next higher grade does not equate to promotion.  The promotable Soldier's total promotion points must meet or exceed the HQDA Monthly SGT/SSG promotion cutoff scores, which are determined and announced monthly.  Additionally, the Soldier must be fully eligible for promotion and issued a promotion instrument (order).  

3.  There are no orders or promotion packet available.  In the absence of his complete promotion packet and evidence that he met the cut-off scores for the recommended MOS there is insufficient evidence to change his rank/grade to SSG/E-6 and, therefore he would not have been eligible for promotion consideration to SFC/E-7.

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)                                         AR20120009970



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120009970



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1