2. The applicant requests that he be promoted to Staff Sergeant, pay grade E-6, effective and with a date of rank of 1 May 1995.
3. The applicant states that he should have made the cutoff score for promotion in his specialty in May 1995. He submitted documents to increase his total promotion points to his personnel center (PAC) in January 1995, which was lost, and resubmitted these documents again in February, which were not processed until March 1995. He states that he would have been promoted in May had the personnel clerk turned in the documents to the personnel support unit on time.
4. The applicant has provided statements from his battalion commander, battalion adjutant, company commander, executive officer, platoon leader, and first sergeant, all who attest that the applicant first submitted documents to increase his promotion points in January 1995, which were lost; and that he submitted another packet in February which was not immediately processed. With the lag time of three months before promotion points become effective, the delay caused the applicant to miss the cutoff score for promotion in his specialty in May 1995.
5. The clerk who initially received the documents from the applicant submitted a statement in which he freely admits that he misplaced these documents, and that when another clerk took over his job, they told the applicant that his packet had been lost. The clerk stated that if the documents had been submitted on time the applicant would have been promoted in May.
6. The applicant submitted a request for exception to policy on 25 April 1995, requesting that he be promoted on
1 May 1995 because of the circumstances concerning his documents for reevaluation of his promotion points. That request was supported by officials in his chain of command. On 3 November 1995 an official of the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) Promotions Branch acknowledged the negligence involved in the processing of the applicants documents for promotion reevaluation, but disapproved his request, citing the procedures contained in the regulation governing enlisted promotions, i.e., the personnel support unit will recompute the administrative points with a reevaluation date the month and year the request for reevaluation is received; promotion points will become effective on the first day of the third month following the month of reevaluation.
7. The applicants worksheet, dated February 1995, with the date edited to read March 1995, and certified by an official in the personnel support unit on 26 April 1995, shows his total promotion points as 701.
8. The promotion point cutoff score for May 1995 in the applicants specialty was 700.
9. Army Regulation 600-8-19 prescribes enlisted promotion policies and procedures. Paragraph 3-20 of that regulation states, in effect, that soldiers who believe they have increased their latest promotion score by 35 points or more can request administrative reevaluation at any time. The personnel support unit will recompute the administrative points with a reevaluation date the month and year the request for reevaluation is received in the personnel support unit. Promotion scores achieved through the reevaluation process are effective for promotion on the first day of the third month following reevaluation.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicants documents for reevaluation of his promotion points were delayed through no fault of his own. Those documents should have been processed and recomputed at the personnel support unit in January 1995, when first submitted.
2. The applicants recomputed promotion score should have been effective on 1 April 1995, the first day of the third month following reevaluation.
3. The applicant met the cutoff score for promotion in his specialty on 1 May 1995. He should be promoted to pay grade E-6 with a date of rank and effective date of promotion of
1 May 1995.
4. In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicants records as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned met the cutoff score for promotion to pay grade
E-6 on 1 May 1995, that he was promoted to that grade with a date of rank and effective date of 1 May 1995, and that he receive all pay and allowances resulting from that promotion.
BOARD VOTE:
GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
CHAIRPERSON
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9508802C070209
The applicant states that he submitted a request for promotion point revaluation (DA Form 3355-E) to his personnel administrative center (PAC) on 3 November 1994 to increase his promotion point total from 736 to 764. The applicant requested that the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) grant an exception to policy and that he be promoted to Staff Sergeant. Notwithstanding the PERSCOM opinion, the applicants reevaluated promotion point score of 764 should have been received and processed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018970
He provided: * A copy of the promotion board proceedings, dated June 2010 * A copy of the amended promotion board proceedings, dated May 2011 * A DA Form 3355 (Promotion Point Worksheet) * A noncommissioned officer evaluation report (NCOER) * A DA Form 705 (Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) Scorecard) * Two DA Forms 3349 (Physical Profile) * Two DA Forms 268 (Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (FLAG)) * Army Training Transcript * Printout from the Army Training Requirements and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120014904
The applicant requests: * correction of his Enlisted Record Brief (ERB) to reflect the correct date and number of promotion points to sergeant (SGT)/E-5 * retroactive promotion to SGT/E-5 with a date of rank (DOR) and effective date of 1 June 2011 2. However, as of 1 May 2011, the applicant was recorded as having 562 promotion points. Therefore, he cannot be promoted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9508222C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: The applicant requests retroactive promotion to Staff Sergeant, pay grade E-6 effective 1 January 1994. APPLICANT STATES: He states, in effect, that his southwest Asia service, worth four promotion points, was overlooked by the promotion NCO upon his initial promotion point computation in November 1992, and because these points were not awarded, he did not meet the cutoff score for promotion in February 1993, and was not promoted in January 1994, immediately after...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080013316
The applicant's military personnel records show that he enlisted in the United States Army Reserve for a period of 8 years on 23 December 1983. The Court dismissed the applicants claim insofar as he requested that the Court order his retroactive promotion because the Court does not have jurisdiction to review and order military promotion decisions. The period of time (i.e., 3 months) from initial computation and/or recomputation of promotion points to the effective date of promotion point...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9510637C070209
He goes on to state that he submitted his request for a PLDC equivalency which was approved on 4 October 1994 and submitted as a part of a reevaluation which became effective 1 March 1995. On 27 September 1993, during a promotion points recomputation, the applicant was granted 30 promotion points for having completed the PLDC while in the National Guard. The applicant submitted a request for PLDC equivalency on 12 September 1994.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011270
The applicant states, in effect: * he is a wounded warrior, serving at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (WRNMMC) * he appeared before the SSG promotion board on 2 August 2012 and was recommended for promotion by the board with a total of 365 points * his points were inaccurately calculated, as the promotions clerk erroneously omitted 19 months of deployment service, equaling 38 points, and an additional 54 points from across other categories * after the August 2012 SSG promotion...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057517C070420
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, reconsideration of his application to show he was awarded 10 points for education improvement and promotion to the rank of staff sergeant/E-6 (SSG/E-6), effective 1 July 2000. On 7July 1999, the applicant went before a promotion board and was awarded 751 promotion points. The Board concurs with the PERSCOM advisory opinion that the adjustment of the applicant’s promotion points from 751 to 741 and his being awarded 1 point for civilian education was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018725
The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment and he responded to the effect that the Board should consider whether he would have attained the required number of points during the period he was hospitalized to be promoted and not whether he submitted the documentation or whether he was present for the recomputation. It provided that promotion recomputations for personnel serving in pay grade E-5 would be conducted in May using records dated as of the last day in April and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607642C070209
Consequently, the applicant met the promotion point cut-off score for 1 July 1996 and should be promoted to the pay grade of E-6 effective that date. In view of the determination by the PERSCOM and the foregoing conclusions, it would be appropriate to promote the applicant to the pay grade of E-6 effective 1 July 1996. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual; concerned was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 effective 1...