RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 April 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070018959 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The following members, a quorum, were present: The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his record be corrected to show he was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 while serving on active duty. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he served honorably during his enlistment and was promoted to specialist four (SP4) in his first year. He claims he was never promoted to a higher rank and feels this was unjust. 3. The applicant provides no additional documentary evidence in support of his 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's record shows that he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 10 June 1970, and was trained in an awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 76W (Petroleum Storage Specialist). 3. The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he was promoted to SP4 on 7 April 1971, and that this is the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty. His record shows that during his active duty tenure, he completed a tour in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) and earned the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), RVN Campaign Medal with Device 60, Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-14) Bar, and Marksman Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-16) Bar. His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement. 4. The applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) is void of any documents that indicate he was ever recommended for or promoted to the pay grade of E-5 by proper authority while serving on active duty. 5. On 25 July 1973, the applicant was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD). The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued at the time confirms he held the rank and pay grade of SP4/E-4, and that he completed a total of 3 years, 1 month, and 16 days of active military service. The applicant authenticated the DD Form 214 with his signature in Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Transferred or Discharged) on the date of his REFRAD. 6. On 26 June 2007, the applicant's DD Form 214 was amended as a result of a decision of this Board. The VSM was deleted from the list of awards and the Army Good Conduct Medal, VSM with 2 bronze service stars, and RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation were added to the list of awards. 7. Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management) contained the Army’s policy for enlisted promotions in effect at the time of the applicant's service. Chapter 7 contained the Army's enlisted promotion policy. It authorized promotions to pay grades E-4 and E-5 based on periodic quotas provided to commands. In most cases, the order of merit for these promotions was established through the use of local promotion selection boards, and promotions had to be authorized by the proper promotion authority, which at the time for E-5 were field grade commanders. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s contention that he should have been promoted to the pay grade of E-5 while serving on active duty was carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim. 2. The evidence of record confirms the highest rank and pay grade the applicant attained while serving on active duty was SP4/E-4 and that this was the rank and pay grade he held on the date he was REFRAD, as evidenced by his DA Form 20 and DD Form 214, which he authenticated with his signature on the date of his REFRAD. In effect, his signature was his verification that the information contained on the separation document, to include his rank and pay grade, was correct at the time the DD Form 214 was prepared and issued. Absent any evidence that indicates he was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 by proper authority while serving on active duty, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief. 3. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement. 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