IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 March 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150007497 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, promotion to sergeant/pay grade E-5. 2. The applicant states: a. In 1972, there was a promotion freeze in the U.S. Army for 1 year. In the fall of 1972, he appeared at a promotion review board for pay grade E-5. b. He was recommended for promotion but did not receive the promotion at that time. c. His commanding officer and his first lieutenant approved the recommendation for promotion when he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B20 (light weapons infantryman) and took over as the unit armorer. d. After he was released from active duty, the Appleton, Wisconsin Reserve Center offered him a promotion to pay grade E-5. e. His company officer's recommendation was not honored. 3. The applicant provides a self-authored statement entitled "A request to honor the past," dated 10 April 2015, and a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge.) 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 into the Army of the United States on 20 January 1971. He was advanced to pay grade E-2 on 20 May 1971 and to pay grade E-3 on 1 August 1971. 3. The applicant completed training as a light weapons infantryman and he was promoted to pay grade E-4 on 23 November 1971. 4. After completing 2 years of total active service, the applicant was released from active duty (REFRAD) on 19 January 1973 at the expiration of his term of service. He was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training). 5. The DD Form 214 he received shows his rank as specialist and his pay grade as E-4. 6. There are no orders in his Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) promoting him to sergeant/pay grade E-5. 7. Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), in effect at the time, contained an Army-wide promotion policy which set Army-wide standards, while at the same time offering Army-wide opportunities for advancement. Chapter 7 stated that promotion of enlisted personnel to grades E-3 through E-9 was announced in routine orders. For pay grades E-5 and E-6, field grade commanders of any organization authorized a commander in the grade of lieutenant colonel (O-5) or higher may promote to grades E-5 and E-6. Control was exercised by all commands to insure that promotions did not exceed the command pay grade vacancies, personnel ceilings directed by Headquarters, Department of the Army or allotted quotas. At the time, there were time in grade and time in service criteria for promotion to E-5. For appointment as an E-5, the Soldier must have had 8 months’ time in grade as an E-4 and 21 months’ time in service. Soldiers must receive a recommendation from their unit command. 8. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), then in effect, established the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. This regulation stated that the active duty grade at the time of separation would be entered on the DD Form 214. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contentions have been noted. His supporting evidence has been considered. 2. There is no evidence in the available record and the applicant has not provided evidence showing that he was recommended and approved for promotion to pay grade E-5 by an officer in the pay grade of O-5. It is acknowledged he met the time in grade and time in service criteria for promotion consideration to E-5 and that potentially his unit commander recommended his promotion to the appropriate approval authority as he contends in his personal statement. 3. He was promoted through the ranks to pay grade E-4. The available evidence shows he was honorably REFRAD in pay grade E-4. The applicant has provided insufficient evidence to show that the appropriate promotion authority promoted him to E-5 prior to his REFRAD. 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) AR20150007497 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150007497 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1