| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Lee Cates | Analyst |
| Mr. James E. Vick | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member | |
| Mr. William D. Barr | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his records be corrected to show his promotion to pay grade E-8.
APPLICANT STATES: That he had 27 years of active and reserve service combined, that he has turned in promotion packets at least three times and that his NCOERS (Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reports) have always been good. He has served in the acting positions of First Sergeant, Senior Drill Instructor, Senior Tank Commander and Training NCO. Further, he indicates he is probably the only decorated Vietnam veteran in the unit. He indicates that while serving temporarily as the Acting First Sergeant, he submitted another promotion packet to pay grade E-8. He was notified in October 1997 that his longevity (time) (sic) was up and he had to get off Active Reserve (USAR) Duty Status. He asked for an extension to carry him until December when the promotion board would meet; however it was denied. He feels he is entitled to promotion to pay grade E-8 because of the number of years he has served his country. He states he would like to have this promotion for retired pay purposes. He indicates the promotion board selected him for promotion to pay grade E-8.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's available military records show:
During the period 12 July 1966 to 5 July 1968 (1 year, 11 months and 24 days), he served in the Army of the United States and was honorably separated in pay grade E-6. He served in Vietnam; however, the available record cannot determine the period. At separation, his separation document indicates his entitlement to award of the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 1960 Device (RVNCM) and 2 overseas service bars.
He was promoted to pay grade E-7 in 1981.
On 17 May 1995, he reenlisted in the USAR for 6 years with 1 year, 11 months and 24 days of active duty and 23 years, 7 months and 19 days of inactive service.
He received excellent NCOER’s during his service, including his service as acting First Sergeant, Senior Drill Instructor, Senior Tank Commander and Training NCO.
His available records do not contain information concerning his retirement, however, the applicant indicates he was placed on the Retired Reserve List in pay grade E-7 effective 1 November 1997 with 28 years and 1 month total combined service. He was 50 years, 10 months and 9 days of age at the time.
Army Regulation 140-10 (Army Reserve – Assignments, Attachments, Details, and Transfers), indicates, in pertinent part, that enlisted soldiers must be removed from an active status within 30 days of completion of 28 years of service, or at age 60, which ever occurs soonest.
Army Regulation 140-158 (Army Reserve – Enlisted Personnel Classification, Promotion, and Reduction), indicates, in pertinent part, that in order to be considered for promotion to pay grade E-8, the individual concerned must be a member of the USAR and assigned to a Troop Program Unit of the Selected Reserve on the date the board convenes.
In the absence of evidence to the contrary, a presumption of regularity applies that the records of the individual concerned are correct.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The applicant was placed on the Retired Reserve List 1 month after completion of 28 years of combined service. His separation from the active Reserve appears proper based on his length of service.
2. There is no evidence of record that promotion packets to pay grade E-8 were ever submitted for him or that he was selected for promotion to pay grade E-8.
3. Records show that he had good NCOERS and that he served in the acting positions he indicated.
4. There is no evidence that he was the only decorated Vietnam veteran in the unit. His decorations included the VSM and the RVNCM; he was not awarded any personal decorations.
5. There is no evidence that he requested an extension until December 1997 or that it was denied.
6. Promotions in the Army Reserve are based on the applicant’s membership in an USAR TPU on the date the board convenes. The applicant was separated prior to the convening of the board. His promotion eligibility terminated on his separation from the active Reserve.
7. This Board operates under the standard of presumption of regularity in governmental affairs. The standard states, in effect, that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board must presume that all actions taken by the military were proper. There is nothing in the records or in the evidence submitted by the applicant that overcomes this presumption.
8. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that her discharge was conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.
9. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
_jev____ _wdb____ _bje____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001057579 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010821 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 131 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007135
In the e-mail correspondence the applicant informed HRC St. Louis that his NCOER was sent to the promotion board on 13 February 2006 and the NCOER was sent to the records custodian for inclusion in his official military personnel file (OMPF) in the beginning of February. On 14 February 2006, the assistant promotion board recorder responded to the applicant. The HRC stated that the applicants request for a STAB was denied because his NCOER was received after the convening date of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140021347
The USAR boards convened August 2009 and January 2010. c. The advisory official's statement implies that the applicant's promotion packet, along with the APFT, was not boarded because he had not attended the SMC before turning age 55. To imply that a Soldier cannot attend or complete the SMC because of being age 55 should be a concern for the U.S. Army especially when there is a regulation which states that a Soldier may continue his duties to the military until age 60, or with a waiver to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003398C070205
Since the applicant was now [at the time] a member of the Active Army, he could not be considered for promotion by an Army Reserve Standby Promotion board. Promotion authorities will only submit promotion packets of all Soldiers who are in a promotable status for consideration. At time of the May 2004 promotion board, the applicant's promotion packet was not qualified for submission as it showed he was not in compliance with height and weight standards; therefore, he was not in a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120019015
(2) Paragraph 3-28b states senior enlisted promotions result when data is provided to the promotion authority that reflects requirements based on current and projected position vacancies; the promotion authority announces the convening date of the selection board, location and description of current and projected position vacancies, zones of consideration for promotion selection, and administrative instructions; personnel records of Soldiers within the zone of consideration are reviewed by...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012030
Requests received after 24 September 2010 will be processed in the order received but may not appear before the board; (8) paragraph 9b states, "In order to guarantee processing prior to board, all mandatory or optional NCOER's must be received, error free, in the Evaluation Reports Branch, HRC, not later than by close of business on 1 October 2010"; e. an undated ATRRS Request for Cancellation/Substitution Form showing his 1SG Course was cancelled because of his flag; f. an email from the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003417
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 August 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120003417 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect: * promotion to the rank/grade of master sergeant (MSG)/E-8 * correction of items 4a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and 4b (Pay Grade) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 11 December 2006 to show his rank/grade as MSG/E-8 * advancement on the Retired List to the rank/grade of MSG/E-8 2. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120011219
Counsel requests: * the applicant's records be submitted to an Army Standby Advisory Board (STAB) for consideration for promotion to sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 * if the applicant is selected, he be promoted to SFC/E-7 with the date of rank (DOR) he would have received had he been selected by the Fiscal Year 2011 (FY11) Senior Enlisted Promotion Board * the applicant be paid back pay and allowances from the date he would have been promoted had he been selected by the FY11 Senior Enlisted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008580
The applicant's military personnel records show he enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 16 June 1980 and his date of birth (DOB) is recorded as 18 June 1948. However, the message that announced that board specifically stated that the eligibility criteria for appointment as TPU CSM included, if the Soldier was a MSG with a PEBD of 1 March 1972 and later (the applicant's PEBD was 16 June 1974) and with a date of rank of 6 June 2001 and earlier (the applicant's date of rank was 16 March...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150008466
Recommendations: The applicant be discharged from the military under Chapter 12, Army Regulation 135-178 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve Enlisted Administrative Separations) for misconduct for continuing incidents of assault and harassment involving the touching of feet of several different female civilians. The available evidence shows the applicant, a senior NCO, was serving on active duty in an AGR position at Fort Shafter, HI when he was investigated for misconduct due to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016579
Additionally, the signatures in Part II (Authentication), in item c (Rated NCO) and item d (Name of Reviewer) of the contested NCOER, are forgeries. The senior rater will obtain the rated NCOs signature or enter the appropriate statement "NCO refuses to sign" or "NCO unavailable for signature." (1) If he is selected for promotion by the Standby Advisory Board and he is otherwise qualified, his record should be corrected by establishing his sergeant first class promotion effective date and...