IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 July 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110001043 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, in effect, correction of his records to show he was promoted to the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5. 2. The applicant states he believes his promotion orders to E-5 were at (his unit) headquarters. He received his orders for transfer to Vietnam but not his promotion orders. This is an error that has bothered him for years. If orders for promotion to E-5 were cut in 1969 in Germany, he would like to set it straight and finally be made a SGT. He further stated he also believes his promotion to E-5 was turned down in Vietnam because he did not want to reenlist. 3. The applicant provided no additional documentation. 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 records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 January 1968 in the rank/grade of private/E-1 and he held military occupational specialty 63C (General Vehicle Repairman). 3. Upon successful completion of advanced individual training, he earned an accelerated promotion to the rank/grade of private/E-2 effective 29 May 1968 in accordance with paragraph 7-19 of Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System). 4. Battery B, Enlisted Student Battalion, Fort Sill, OK, Unit Orders Number 45, dated 2 August 1968, promoted him to the rank/grade of private first class/E-3. 5. Headquarters, 4th Armored Division, Germany, Special Orders Number 64, dated 24 February 1969, promoted him to the rank/grade of specialist four (SP4)/E-4. 6. Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows the highest rank/grade he held while serving on active duty was that of SP4/E-4. 7. He served in the Republic of Vietnam from on or about 4 April 1970 to 21 January 1971 while assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 14th Engineer Battalion. 8. 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. His rank is shown as SP4. 9. On 21 January 1971, he was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group to complete his remaining Reserve obligation. Items 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and 5b (Pay Grade) of his DD Form 214 shows the entries "SP4" and "E-4" respectively. He authenticated this form by placing his signature in the appropriate block. 10. There are no orders in the applicant's record that show he was promoted to SGT/E-5. 11. Army Regulation 600-200, in effect at the time, stated the promotion of enlisted personnel to grades E-3 through E-9, appointments, grade reductions, and grade restoration were announced in routine orders. Field grade commanders in the rank of lieutenant colonel or higher could promote to E-5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The evidence of record shows that at the time of his separation, on 21 January 1971, the applicant held the rank of SP4/E-4. 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. Therefore, he is not entitled to 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 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) AR20110001043 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110001043 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1