| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Gale J. Thomas | Analyst |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, promotion to the pay grade of E-8. The applicant states, in effect, that some of his credits of study were not posted to his records when he was considered for promotion to E-8.
PURPOSE: To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 29 March 1979, he reenlisted in the Regular Army in the pay grade of E-7, for a period of 6 years.
On 4 April 1986, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for driving while intoxicated. This reprimand was filed in the applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).
On 31 July 1987, the applicant submitted a request for voluntary retirement. His retirement request was approved, and on 31 January 1988, he was retired under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 12, for length of service. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) indicates he had a total of 20 years and 22 days of service.
The Senior (Centralized) Enlisted Army Promotion System began on 1 March 1969 for promotion to Master Sergeant (E-8). The centralized promotion system which consisted of a Headquarters, Department of the Army Promotion Board, was designed to promote those individuals who after competing equally with their contemporaries were found to be the best qualified. Historically, centralized boards convene annually to select a specified number of soldiers for promotion to the senior ranks.
Army Regulation 600-200, chapters 7, in effect at the time, provided that selection by a Department of the Army board would be based on impartial consideration of all eligible soldiers in an announced zone of consideration. The board was directed to select the best qualified soldier in each military occupational specialty (MOS).
There is no evidence in the applicant's available records nor did he provide documentation to substantiate his claim that his educational information was incorrect at the time he was considered for promotion to E-8.
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. Failure to file within 3 years may be excused by a correction board if it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
DISCUSSION: The alleged error or injustice was, or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered on 31 January 1988, the date of the applicant's retirement. The time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 31 January 1991.
The application is dated 23 February 2001 and the applicant has not explained or otherwise satisfactorily demonstrated by competent evidence that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to apply within the time allotted.
DETERMINATION: The subject application was not submitted within the time required. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient justification to conclude that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the relief requested or to excuse the failure to file within the time prescribed by law. Prior to reaching this determination the Board looked at the applicant's entire file. It was only after all aspects of his case had been considered and it had been concluded that there was no basis to recommend a correction of his record that the Board considered the statute of limitations. Had the Board determined that an error or injustice existed it would have recommended relief in spite of the applicant's failure to submit his application within the three-year time limit.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ EXCUSE FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__WTM _ __AAO _ __JTM __ CONCUR WITH DETERMINATION
| CASE ID | AR2001053949 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010731 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 131.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608393C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be promoted on the retired list to the pay grade of E-9. It stated, in pertinent part, that eligibility for promotion consideration to the pay grades of E-7 through E-9 was based on the date of rank and that in order to be eligible for inclusion in the zone of consideration, the individual concerned must have been serving on active duty in an enlisted status on the convening date of the board and must not have had an approved retirement before the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9510032C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, correction of appropriate military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow reenlistment. The bar to reenlistment was based on the applicants record of service, his duty performance and future potential for retention in the Army. On 11 April 1989, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-5, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5, (HQDA Imposed Bar To Reenlistment) with an honorable character of service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007300
The applicant requests correction of his military records by showing he was considered for and promoted to master sergeant, pay grade E-8 and to sergeant major, pay grade E-9. On 30 September 1988, orders were published announcing the applicant's promotion to sergeant first class, pay grade E-7 effective 1 November 1988, with a date of rank of 5 October 1988. The applicant contends that his military records should be corrected by showing he was considered for and promoted to master...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03331
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03331 (Case 2) INDEX CODE: 131.00, 131.01 COUNSEL: MR. THOMAS C. HOUCK HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 30 APRIL 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reinstatement to active duty, with back pay, and constructive promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001051549C070420
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. On 3 January 1977, his battalion commander issued a Letter of Reprimand for having sex with his daughters, under the age of 16. The applicant has not...
By letter, dated 7 July 1997, applicant requested reconsideration of the Board’s decision and provided additional documentation in the form of a 5 May 1977 letter, subject: Basis of Board Selections, and a document entitled “Evidentiary Support: Illegal Selection Boards.” (Exhibit H) ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Special Selections Boards (SSBs) and central selection boards which considered his file were conducted contrary to...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1988-00782
By letter, dated 7 July 1997, applicant requested reconsideration of the Board’s decision and provided additional documentation in the form of a 5 May 1977 letter, subject: Basis of Board Selections, and a document entitled “Evidentiary Support: Illegal Selection Boards.” (Exhibit H) ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Special Selections Boards (SSBs) and central selection boards which considered his file were conducted contrary to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021292
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 18 July 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120021292 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The available evidence does not support the applicant's request for correction of his record to show he was promoted to SFC/E-7. _______ _ _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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199709080
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. On 15 February 1966 the applicant was notified that his request for recall to active duty was not favorably considered because he was not qualified in one of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004566C070208
The advisory opinion also noted, however, that the applicant was not selected for promotion to colonel by the 1991, 1992, and 1994 Reserve promotion selection boards, selection for which was based on the Soldier's performance and service record. (On 17 March 2005, that office informed the Board analyst that, since the letter of reprimand was still filed on his performance fiche during the 1992 and 1994 promotion selection boards, his records should be reconsidered for promotion under the...