Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607238C070209
Original file (9607238C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected to reflect that he was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 effective 1 August 1995 to coincide with his date of rank (DOR) of 1 August 1995 and that he be paid all back pay and allowances from that date.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that an error was made in the computation of his promotion points that resulted in his being promoted effective 8 March 1996 with a DOR of 1 August 1995.  However, because the effective date of his promotion was 8 March 1996 he has been unable to receive his back pay for the promotion.
  
4.  The applicant’s military records show that while serving in the USAR in the pay grade of E-4, he enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 February 1993 for a period of 4 years.

5.  On 8 March 1996 orders were published which promoted the applicant to the pay grade of E-5 effective 8 March 1996, with a DOR of 1 August 1995.

6.  In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) Promotions Branch which opined that the applicant’s promotion was valid and that his records should be corrected to reflect an effective date of 1 August 1995 in order to coincide with his date of rank.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was properly promoted on 8 March 1996 with a DOR of 1 August 1995.  However, the applicant’s effective date of 8 March 1996, the date the orders were published, effectively denied him the benefits (pay and allowances) that he otherwise would have been entitled to receive, had he been properly promoted on 1 August 1995.  Therefore, his orders should have reflected an effective date of 1 August 1995 in order for the applicant to receive retroactive pay and allowances for the promotion.

2.  In the interest of justice, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records to reflect a DOR and effective date of 1 August 1995.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by changing the effective date of promotion of the individual concerned from 8 March 1996 to
1 August 1995, with entitlement to all pay and allowances from that date.                

BOARD VOTE:  

                       GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




		                           
		        CHAIRPERSON

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062450C070421

    Original file (2001062450C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states that he was eligible for promotion to major on 1 April 1996, and was not considered for promotion by either active or Reserve boards due to his separation date from active duty. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that he was eligible for promotion to major on 1 April 1996, and was not considered for promotion by either active or Reserve boards due to his separation from active duty. Therefore, the applicant’s correct DOR and effective date for promotion to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070007821

    Original file (20070007821.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The 343rd Combat Support Hospital, Brooklyn, New York, Report of Promotion Board Proceedings for Promotion to SGT/E-5 and SSG/E-6, dated 5 October 1995. c. Department of the Army, Headquarters, 77th RSC, Fort Totten, New York, Promotion Orders Number 72-2, to SGT/E5, dated 5 March 1996. d. DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 11 June 1996, request for correction of DOR, together with the commander's endorsement, dated 18 July 1996, and the 77th RSC response, dated 13 September 1996. There...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071280C070402

    Original file (2002071280C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 30 June 1995, the effective date of the MOS conversion, the applicant was reclassified into MOS 31R20P7. The applicant met all these requirements at the time of the MOS conversion and should have been converted to MOS 31S with the ASI of Y2 at that time. In view of the facts of this case, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate at this time to correct the effective date of the applicant’s reclassification into MOS 31S to 30 June 1995.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023269

    Original file (20100023269.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states, in effect, that at the time of each erroneous reduction in grade he had made the promotion list for the next higher grade and he was subsequently told that be would be placed before a stand-by board but his unit was called to active duty. A review of the available records failed to show any evidence to indicate that the applicant appeared before a promotion selection board for promotion to the pay grade of E-6, that he attained promotion list standing, or that he would...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058285C070421

    Original file (2001058285C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 7 August 1996, the ABCMR recommended that the applicant’s discharge be revoked and that he be promoted as though he had been selected by the original promotion board (case AC96-07492). The board consider the applicant for promotion. He should be first considered for promotion to LTC by the CY2004 promotion board.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080013158

    Original file (20080013158.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application: ARNG Current Annual Statement, dated 2 November 2005; National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), effective 1 June 1998; Office of the Adjutant General of Virginia (OTAG) Orders 132-043, dated 12 May 1998; 1995 SSG Promotion List, dated 11 February 1996; Headquarters, 80th Division (Institutional Training) Orders 135-18, dated 30 November 1994; 229th Engineer Battalion, 29th...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084855C070212

    Original file (2003084855C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his major (MAJ) date of rank (DOR) be adjusted to 30 June 1994 based on the constructive credit he received upon his appointment in the United States Army Reserve (USAR). The record also confirms that based on the applicant’s constructive service credit his PED to MAJ would have been established as 30 June 1994; however, he remained in training in the STRAP through 30 June 1996, and at the applicant’s request in an application to this Board, action...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016770

    Original file (20080016770.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, award of constructive credit for his 10 years of pastoral experience and adjustment to his dates of rank (DOR) for captain and major. In support of his application, the applicant provides copies of an Army Reserve Personnel Center-St. Louis (ARPC-SL) Form 1035 (Computation Sheet for Establishing Constructive Commissioned Service Date, DOR, and Projected Promotion Eligibility Date of Reserve Officers), two DD Forms 2088, his U.S. Army Reserve (USAR)...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020317

    Original file (20090020317.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The evidence of record shows he was appointed as a 1LT, Chaplain Corps, with a DOR of 25 August 1994. Once he is appointed in the USAR in the correct grade, USAHRC officials should determine the earliest dates he would have qualified for consideration for promotion to MAJ and LTC and, if necessary, have his records be considered for promotion by a special selection board to MAJ and LTC, under the appropriate year(s) criteria, as soon as he became eligible for such promotions based on his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607251C070209

    Original file (9607251C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of the effective date of his promotion to the pay grade of E-2 to reflect 30 May 1995 with entitlement to all back pay and allowances from that date. The applicable regulation cited in the applicant’s orders contains a provision that allowed the commander to effect a change to the applicant’s effective date of promotion and would have allowed him to be paid back pay. RECOMMENDATION: That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be...