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 doesn’t know why he wasn’t 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 applicant’s 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 applicant’s 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