2. The applicant requests that his promotion to the pay grade of E-5 be backdated to 1 March 1996.
3. The applicant states that he met the cutoff score for promotion to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 April 1996. However, because his basic active service date (BASD) was incorrect on his records, he was not considered eligible in the primary zone and thus was not promoted until 1 May 1996.
4. The applicants military records show that the applicant initially enlisted on 29 August 1988 for a period of 4 years. He served until he was honorably released from active duty at his scheduled expiration of term of service on 26 August 1992 and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Ready).
5. On 26 August 1993 the applicant again enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years in the pay grade of E-4. His BASD was established as 28 August 1989.
6. The applicant appeared before an E-5 promotion board in July 1995 and was recommended for promotion. He attained list standing and his points were effective 1 October 1995. He had 561 points at that time.
7. On 1 March 1996 the promotion point cutoff score for promotion to the pay grade of E-5 in the primary zone (36 months or more of active federal service) was 560 points. However, the applicants records indicated that the applicants BASD was 26 August 1993, (the date he enlisted for the second time) which placed the applicant in the secondary zone (less than 36 months of service). Consequently, the applicant was not promoted until the following month with an effective date and date of rank of 1 April 1996.
8. In the processing of this case a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (EREC) which opined that the applicant was eligible for promotion to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 March 1996 and recommended that his records be corrected accordingly.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. An administrative error which resulted in the applicants BASD being incorrectly annotated in the applicants personnel records has unjustly caused the applicants promotion to the pay grade of E-5 to be delayed a month.
2. The applicant was eligible to be promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 March 1996 and therefore it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicants records to reflect that he was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 effective 1 March 1996 with entitlement to all pay and allowances from that date.
3. In view of the foregoing the applicants records should be corrected 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 was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 effective 1 March 1996 with entitlement to all pay and allowances from that date.
BOARD VOTE:
GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
CHAIRPERSON
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 | CY2015 | 20150000209
The applicant requests, in effect, promotion to sergeant (SGT)/pay grade E-5 effective 1 August 2013 and all back pay due as a result. The applicant provides: * four promotion point worksheets (PPW) Unofficial Copy * an HRC memorandum, subject: Department of the Army Promotion Point Cutoff Scores for 1 August 2013 and Junior Enlisted Issues for the Active Army (AA) * a memorandum, subject: Request an Administrative Records Correction (ARC) for [Applicant], issued by Headquarters, 532nd...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605407C070209
The clerk stated that if the documents had been submitted on time the applicant would have been promoted in May. 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. On 3 November 1995 an official of the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) Promotions Branch acknowledged the negligence involved in the processing of the...
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 | CY1995 | 9508806C070209
The applicant states that two other soldiers received an exception to policy, one because he did not have a seat for the May 1993 class; and the other after attending the May 1993 class, because he was not afforded the opportunity to attend BNCOC prior to the effective date of his promotion. On 17 November 1992 the applicants commanding officer requested an exception to the policy linking completion of BNCOC to promotion in order for the applicant to be promoted to pay grade E-6. On 16...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003382
c. When Military Personnel (MILPER) Message Number 08-033, subject: (Updated) AAA-294 Enlisted Promotion Report Automatic List Integration Section for Staff Sergeant) was issued on 1 February 2008, he was never informed of its provisions and he was not aware of any action by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) to put him on the standing list for promotion to SSG/E-6. The company commander, first sergeant, and the battalion command sergeant major formed negative opinions of him...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01133
Applicant was considered for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6), and selected, by the 92A6 promotion cycle with a date of rank (DOR) and effective date of 1 October 1991. Subsequent to the applicant’s retirement from the Air Force on 1 January 1996, he was awarded the Defense Meritorious Service Medal (DMSM) for the period 2 March 1986 to 31 December 1990, for meritorious service, per Permanent Orders 310-01, dated 6 November 1997. As stated by AFPC/DPPPWB, had the Defense...
Applicant was considered for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6), and selected, by the 92A6 promotion cycle with a date of rank (DOR) and effective date of 1 October 1991. Subsequent to the applicant’s retirement from the Air Force on 1 January 1996, he was awarded the Defense Meritorious Service Medal (DMSM) for the period 2 March 1986 to 31 December 1990, for meritorious service, per Permanent Orders 310-01, dated 6 November 1997. As stated by AFPC/DPPPWB, had the Defense...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012279
He provided a memorandum from the 191st CSSB, dated 27 December 2012, subject: Promotion Board Proceedings for Promotion to SGT and SSG, recommending the applicant for promotion to SGT. HRC memorandum for U.S. Army Promotion Work Centers, dated 22 February 2013, subject: Department of the Army Promotion Point Cutoff Scores for 1 March 2013 and Junior Enlisted Issues, announcing promotion point cutoff scores for 1 March 2013. a. He provided a copy of his email to HRC, dated 3 June 2013,...
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...