IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  8 October 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140001611 


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 reconsideration of his earlier request for correction of his records to show he held the rank/pay grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5 instead of specialist five (SP5)/E-5.

2.  The applicant states:

* the Board's previous decision was inequitable and too harsh as evidenced by his bronze service star for his Vietnam service (campaign credit)
* he should have received a permanent promotion in 1967
* he would have received a permanent promotion to the rank of SGT under today's standards
* he never held military occupational specialty (MOS) 16B (Hercules Missile Crewman)
* he held MOS 52B (Power Generation Equipment Operator/Mechanic) and this was his only MOS
* he was 20 years old and in the Army in 1965 and he was in Vietnam in 1966

3.  The applicant provides:

* self-authored statements
* DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge)
* two previous Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) determinations, AR20130000641 and AC98-08428
* second page of Headquarters, 1st Cavalry Division, Special Orders Number 21, dated 21 January 1967

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20130000641 on 22 August 2013.

2.  The applicant provided new arguments that warrant consideration by the Board.

3.  On 17 June 1965, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he was awarded MOS 16B on 1 November 1965.  On 2 March 1966, he was subsequently awarded primary MOS 52B and assigned 16B as his secondary MOS.

4.  Headquarters, 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile), Special Orders Number 21, dated 21 January 1967, appointed the applicant to the temporary rank/pay grade of SP5/E-5 in primary MOS 52B effective 21 January 1967.

5.  His DA Form 20 shows in:

	a.  item 2 (Grade), SP5/E-5;

	b.  item 3 (Date of Rank (DOR)), 21 January 1967;

	c.  item 31 (Foreign Service), Vietnam from 14 July 1966 through 10 July 1967;

	d.  item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) –

* SP5/E-5 (temporary) – DOR 21 January 1967
* SP5/E-5 (permanent) – DOR 21 January 1968

	e.  item 38 (Record of Assignments), from 17 July 1966 through 8 July 1967 –

* duty MOS – 52B
* principle duty – powerman (Power Generator Specialist)
* organization – 11th General Support Aviation Company, 1st Cavalry Division

6.  On 28 August 1967, the applicant requested permissive reassignment to Fort Dix, NJ.  His signature block shows his rank as SP5.

7.  On 14 June 1968, the applicant was honorably released from active duty.  His DD Form 214 shows he completed 2 years, 11 months, and 28 days of active service.  It also shows in:

	a.  item 5a (Grade, Rate, or Rank), SP5 (permanent);

	b.  item 5b (Pay Grade), E-5;

	c.  item 6 (DOR), 21 January 1967; and

	d.  item 30 (Remarks), "Item 6:  Date of Appointment 21 Jan 68 [21 January 1968]."

8.  ABCMR Docket Number AC98-08428, dated 5 August 1998, affirmed the applicant's promotion to SP5/E-5 (temporary) effective 21 January 1967 vice the requested November 1966 date.

9.  Army Regulation 611-201 (Enlisted Career Management Fields and Military Occupational Specialties), which identified the standard of grade authorizations for various military specialties, noted that as late as 1979 MOS 52B was authorized the rank of SP5 and not SGT upon promotion to pay grade E-5.

10.  Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), in effect at the time, prescribed policies, responsibilities, and procedures pertaining to the career management of Army enlisted personnel.  This regulation stated:

	a.  Individuals promoted to grades E-5 and E-6 would be promoted to specialist grades rather than noncommissioned officer (NCO) grades.  Exceptions were authorized only when:

		(1)  the standards of grades authorization (SGA) did not contain a specialist skill level for the grade and 3-digit MOS to which promotion was being accomplished, or

		(2)  when the SGA contained both specialist and NCO skills levels for the grade and 3-digit MOS to which promotion was being accomplished, and the individual occupied an authorized NCO position vacancy at the next higher pay grade level in the current table of organization and equipment, modified table of organization and equipment, table of distribution and allowances, or other authorization document.  An individual could not be promoted to SGT or staff sergeant if the promotion would cause a surplus of by-grade authorized NCO personnel in the unit to which the individual was assigned.

	b.  Later versions of the regulation stated that unit commanders could appoint qualified individuals as acting corporals (E-4) and acting SGT's (E-5) to serve in position vacancies existing in their units, including those resulting from temporary absences of assigned NCO's.  Appointment of acting NCO's and termination of such status was to be announced in orders issued by the appointing authority.  An acting NCO's status terminated upon reassignment to another unit, at the discretion of the unit commander who made the appointment, and upon assignment of a regularly-promoted NCO to the position.

	c.  Lateral appointments from specialist to NCO grades were authorized when the SGA changed to delete provisions for specialists in that pay grade and MOS.

11.  The Army discontinued the ranks of SP5 and specialist six (SP6) effective 1 October 1985.

12.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed policies and procedures regarding separation documents.  It also established standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  It stated the purpose of a separation document was to provide the individual with documentary evidence of his or her military service at the time of separation.

	a.  Section III (Instructions for Preparation and Distribution of the Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) contained guidance for preparation of the DD Form 214.

	b.  It stated all available records would be used as a basis for preparation of the DD Form 214, including the Enlisted Qualification Record, Officer Qualification Record, and orders.  The instructions for:

		(1)  item 5a stated to enter the grade in which serving at the time of separation, indicating whether permanent or temporary (e.g., SP5 (P));

		(2)  item 5b stated to enter the pay grade;

		(3)  item 6 stated to enter the DOR for the grade shown in item 5a; and

		(4)  item 30 stated the remarks section would be used to complete entries too long for their respective items.  Specifically, if the grade shown in item 5 was not permanent, enter the permanent grade, date of appointment, and date of rank; otherwise, enter the date of appointment to the permanent grade.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant failed to present sufficient evidence showing he was promoted to the permanent NCO rank/pay grade of SGT/E-5.

2.  Assumption of a duty position does not automatically confer promotion of a Soldier.

3.  Although the Army discontinued the ranks of SP5 and SP6 effective 1 October 1985, the applicant was released from active duty in 1968.  In 1968, SP5 was the appropriate rank for pay grade E-5 for his MOS at the time of his separation.

4.  In view of the above, there is no evidentiary basis for granting the requested relief.

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 the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20130000641, dated 22 August 2013.



      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20140001611



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140001611



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1