IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 3 March 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100022221 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 items 5a and 5b (Grade, Rate or Rank/Pay Grade) of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show sergeant (SGT)/E-5. 2. The applicant states, in effect, his DD Form 214 shows his rank as specialist four (SPC 4)/E-4; however, according to a document from the Department of the Army he was promoted but he did not receive the correct pay for the promotion. 3. The applicant provides a DD Form 214 and a memorandum, Subject: E-6 and E-5 Standing Promotion List, dated 6 September 1971. 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 April 1970 in the rank and pay grade of private/E-1. He completed the training requirements and he was awarded military occupational specialty 67N (UH-1 Helicopter Repairman). 3. Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he was promoted to private/E-2 on 26 June 1970, to private first class/E-3 on 25 April 1970 (sic), and to specialist four (SP4)/E-4 on 18 September 1970. Item 33 does not show he was promoted to SGT/E-5. 4. A memorandum, Subject: E-6 and E-5 Standing Promotion List, dated 6 September 1971, and released by the 222nd Aviation Battalion (Combat), shows he was recommended for promotion to the rank and grade of SGT/E-5. 5. Headquarters, U.S. Army Personnel Center, Fort Lewis, WA, Special Orders Number 40, dated 9 February 1972, shows the applicant was released from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) effective 10 February 1972. These orders show his rank as SP4. 6. On 10 February 1972, he was honorably released from active duty. Items 5a and 5b of his DD Form 214 show his rank and pay grade as SP4/E-4. 7. There are no orders or any other evidence in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) that show he was promoted to SGT/E-5 prior to his release from active duty. 8. 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. It establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214. It states the DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active service and provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement or discharge. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contention that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show his rank and grade as SGT/E-5 has been carefully reviewed. 2. There are no orders or any other evidence in his OMPF that show he was promoted to SGT/E-5 prior to his release from active duty. The memorandum he provided shows he was recommended for promotion, not promoted, to SGT/E-5. Therefore, the available evidence is insufficient to correct his DD Form 214 to show his rank as SGT/E-5. 3. Based on the foregoing, his request should be denied. 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) AR20100022221 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100022221 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1