IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 July 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090021739 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 to be promoted to the rank/grade of master sergeant (MSG)/E-8. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he completed the advanced noncommissioned officer course (ANCOC) in "a highly satisfactory manner." He adds "Successful completion of this course meets the military education requirements for promotion to the grade of E-8." 3. The applicant provides a copy of his: * Certificate of Retirement, dated 5 September 2002 * DA Form 2166-6 (Enlisted Evaluation Report) for the period 8110 through 8210 * DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) for completion of ANCOC, dated 29 July 1989 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 is a retired Reserve Component (RC) Soldier, having served in the Army National Guard (ARNG) and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) for more than 27 years from January 1961 to 30 June 1992. He was subsequently discharged from the California ARNG (CAARNG) and he was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Retired). 3. The record shows the applicant was promoted to sergeant first class (SFC/ E-7) on 15 June 1982. The record does not show he was ever selected for or promoted to the rank of MSG. 4. Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) prescribes the enlisted promotions and reductions function of the military personnel system. It is linked to the Army Regulation 600-8 series and provides principles of support, standards of service, policies, tasks, rules, and steps governing all work required in the field to support promotions and reductions. It provides the objectives of the Army's Enlisted Promotions System, which include filling authorized enlisted spaces with the best qualified Soldiers. Further, this system provides for career progression and rank that are in line with potential and for recognition of the best qualified Soldier, which will attract and retain the highest caliber Soldier for a career in the Army. Additionally, the system precludes promoting the Soldier who is not productive or not the best qualified, thus providing an equitable system for all Soldiers. There are many rules regarding ARNG promotions: * The State Adjutant General (AG) is the convening and promotion authority for all promotion boards to sergeant (SGT)/E-5 through sergeant major (SGM)/E-9 * Selection criteria include time-in-grade, time-in-service, high school diploma/equivalency, military occupational specialty (MOS) qualified, noncommissioned officer educational system (NCOES) qualified, etc. * Ineligibility criteria include enlistment bars, physically unfit, unsatisfactory participation, transfer to the Inactive National Guard (ING), etc. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant, who was discharged from the CAARNG, placed in the Retired Reserve on 30 June 1992, and became eligible for retired pay on 5 September 2002, believes he should have been promoted to MSG because he completed ANCOC. 2. Possessing the appropriate NCOES level is but one component of the promotion system; there are many other criteria to consider in promoting an NCO to MSG. The promotion system is competitive and seeks to promote the best qualified Soldier. 3. The applicant's record has been reviewed and there are no promotion orders to MSG in his file. Likewise, there is no indication that he was ever denied promotion consideration based upon a stated ineligibility criterion. Absent evidence to the contrary, regularity is presumed in the applicant's case and that he was never promoted beyond SFC for valid reasons. 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) AR20090021739 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090021739 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1