IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 10 September 2015
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150000912
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 DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show his rank as sergeant (SGT) and his pay grade as E-5.
2. The applicant states he thinks that his unit was ordered to come back to the United States since they only had a short time left. He really doesnt know why he wasnt paid in the higher pay grade since his platoon leader told him he had been promoted.
3. The applicant provides a Headquarters, 1st Battalion, 14th Infantry letter, dated 19 November 1970.
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 was inducted on 29 July 1969. He completed training as an infantryman and was posted to Vietnam.
3. His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows in:
a. Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions)
* advanced to private (E-2) on 2 October 1969
* advanced to private first class (E-3) on 16 January 1970
* advanced to specialist four (SP4)(E-4) on 18 July 1970
b. Item 38 (Record of Assignments)
* service in Vietnam with A Company, 1st Battalion, 14th Infantry from 31 January 1969 through 21 November 1970
* enroute to the United States on 22 November 1970
* joined A Company, 5th Battalion, 33rd Armor, Fort Knox, Kentucky on 5 January 1971
* released from active duty (REFRAD) on 28 June 1971
4. His DA Form 1811 (Physical and Mental Status on Release from Active Service), dated 28 July 1971, shows his rank as SP4.
5. U.S. Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, Kentucky Special Orders Number 173 of 21 July 1971 directed the applicants REFRAD and shows his rank as SP4.
6. His DD Form 214 shows he was REFRAD on 28 June 1971, his rank as SP4, and his pay grade as E-4.
7. The 19 November 1970 letter that the applicant submitted in support of his application states This standing promotion list supersedes standing list for grade E-5 dated 29 October 1970. It shows that the applicant had 505.5 promotion points.
8. 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.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicants DA Form 20 shows the highest rank he obtained was SP4. His REFRAD orders and DA Form 1811 show that rank. There is no evidence to show he was promoted to SGT.
2. 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 held was specialist four (E-4), and his separation orders listed his rank as SP4.
3. In the absence of documentary evidence confirming he was promoted to sergeant, pay grade 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) AR20150000912
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150000912
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008548
The applicant requests, in effect, that his record be corrected to show he held the rank of sergeant (SGT) at the time of his release from active duty (REFRAD). It informed the applicant that the order he provided was not a promotion order and that the rank listed on the order could have been an error. He further indicated that no record was found to show he was ever promoted to SGT and that his records showed at the time of his REFRAD on 3 October 1969 and at the time of his discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003075
The applicant requests that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show that he was released from active duty (REFRAD) in the rank and pay grade of Sergeant (SGT)/E-5. The applicant states that he was promoted to the rank of SGT on 30 August 1971; however, his DD Form 214 shows he was REFRAD as a Specialist Four (SP4)/E-4. There is no evidence in his records of his having been reduced from the rank of SGT prior to his REFRAD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003941
The applicant requests, in effect, that his military records be corrected to show his date of birth as 8 May 1949 vice 8 March 1949. There are no documents or orders in the applicant's record that show he was promoted to the grade of SGT/E-5. Evidence of record shows that the applicant was promoted to E-4 in January 1970.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001043
Headquarters, U.S. Army Personnel Center, Fort Lewis, WA, Special Orders Number 21, dated 21 January 1971, relieved him from active duty effective 21 January 1971. There are no orders in the applicant's record that show he was promoted to SGT/E-5. His record is void of any promotion orders to SGT/E-5 and item 33 of his DA Form 20 does not show he held the rank of SGT/E-5.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017078
His record contains a DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) which shows in: a. item 29 (Qualification in Arms), he qualified as a: (1) Sharpshooter with the M-60 machine gun on 26 February 1969; and (2) Marksman with the M-16 rifle on 20 February 1969. b. item 31 (Foreign Service), he served in U.S. Army Pacific Command (USARPAC) - Korea from 25 April 1969 through 24 May 1970, a period of 1 year and 1 month; c. item 33 (Appointments and Reductions), no indication that he was promoted to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120017300
The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show that he was discharged in the rank of Sergeant (SGT) E-5. The applicant states his records show he was discharged in the rank of Corporal (CPL) E-4 but he was promoted and was serving in the rank of SGT, E-5 at the time of his separation. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015564
The applicant states, in effect, that he was on the promotion standing list for promotion to the pay grade of E-5 and desires to know if he was in fact promoted to the pay grade of E-5 before he was discharged. A review of the applicant's official records shows no evidence that the applicant was ever promoted to the pay grade of E-5 or that he ever made a Department of the Army announced cut-off score before he was REFRAD on 6 March 1972. The applicant has failed to show through the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120008072
There is no evidence of record, and the applicant provides insufficient evidence, to show he was appointed or promoted to grade E-5. The evidence of record shows: a. general orders awarded the applicant the: * Bronze Star Medal * Purple Heart b. the applicant qualified for award of the Vietnam Service Medal and he served in four campaigns during his service in Vietnam. Thus, he is entitled to four bronze service stars for wear on his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal; c. special orders...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016458
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 February 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080016458 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant provided a Certificate of Appreciation for service in the Armed Forces of the United States during the period 18 November 1969 through 22 June 1971 that shows his rank as SGT. Therefore, his DD Form 214 for the ending period of 22 June 1971, which shows he was promoted on 16 September 1970 to the rank of SP4/E-4, is correct.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020177
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his records to show he was never in an absent without leave (AWOL) status. Items 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and 5b (Pay Grade) of his DD Form 214 shows he was a SP4/E-4 at the time of his separation. The applicant contends he was recommended for promotion on two occasions; however, he was not promoted due to an error in his record which indicated he was AWOL when he was actually hospitalized and serving in Vietnam.