BOARD DATE: 14 May 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140016491 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 his records to show he retired as a sergeant (SGT) in pay grade E-5. 2. He states he was retired as a specialist (SPC) in pay grade E-4, but he should have been promoted to SGT. He was told by his chain of command that promotion was unnecessary because his promotion points had not changed. He believes the reason he was not promoted was due to nonjudicial punishment (NJP) he received. The NJP was based on a misunderstanding with an employee of the Army Emergency Relief (AER) who told him to change some paperwork. He was also hospitalized twice, but nothing was done intentionally. He served cumulatively for 7 years, 3 months, and 12 days. He gave his time and energy and made sacrifices. He feels he earned a promotion to SGT. 3. The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release for Discharge from Active Duty). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Following prior active duty service the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 January 2007. He held military occupational specialty 88M (Motor Transport Operator). 2. His Enlisted Record Brief (ERB), dated 7 August 2013, shows the highest rank/grade he attained was SPC/E-4 with an effective date of rank of 1 September 2008. In addition, it shows he failed the Army physical fitness test in October 2008 and his record was suspended for favorable personnel actions or flagged effective 17 October 2012. 3. His record does not contain any documentation showing he was recommended for or promoted to SGT during his active duty service nor is there any record of NJP. His ERB shows he had 39 promotion points effective October 2012 and he had no promotion sequence number. 4. He was retired due to permanent physical disability on 25 October 2013. He had completed 6 years, 9 months, and 8 days of active duty service this period. His DD Form 214 shows in item 4a (Grade, Rate, or Rank) "SPC" and in item 4b (Pay Grade) "E-4." 5. In the processing of this case an advisory opinion dated 3 November 2014, was obtained from the Chief, Department of the Army (DA) Promotions, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), Fort Knox, Kentucky. The advising official recommended disapproval of the applicant's request. The official stated: a. The available records indicate the applicant was Command List Integrated (CLI) from December 2010 to September 2012 and in May 2013. He did not meet or exceed a Headquarters, DA cutoff score when he was on the CLI. b. MILPER Message 12-309 (Removal of Ineligible Promotable Soldiers (SPC/CPL/SGT) from the Promotion Standing List) published on 26 September 2012, stated that over 8,000 Soldiers were erroneously listed on the SGT/Staff Sergeant (SSG) promotion standing list. (The reasons were Army physical fitness test failures, overweight, bars to promotion or similar adverse personnel action or information.) The applicant was flagged on 17 October 2012, by the HRC Junior Enlisted Promotion Section after being identified as one of those Soldiers. c. His physical fitness test expired in October 2009 resulting in his erroneous promotion list status in 2010 through 2013. In addition, he was flagged by his unit effective 16 September 2013 for an adverse action making him ineligible for promotion consideration to SGT through his separation date of 25 October 2013. 6. The applicant was provided a copy of the HRC advisory opinion on 15 December 2014 and he failed to respond. 7. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, states in paragraph 2-1 that the DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier’s most recent period of continuous active duty. It provides a brief, clear cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge. For item 4a and 4b enter active duty grade of rank and pay grade at time of separation. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant had been identified as being among the 8,000 Soldiers who were erroneously listed on the SGT/SSG CLI because his physical fitness test expired in October 2009. In addition, he received a second flag effective 16 September 2013 for an adverse action which also made him ineligible for promotion consideration to SGT. 2. As the applicant was not on the CLI as being in a promotable status on the date of his separation from the Regular Army, 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) AR20140016491 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1