| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. G. E. Vandenberg | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Thomas B. Redfern III | Member | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. | Member |
THE BOARD ADDITIONALLY FINDS:
7. The applicant requests that the Board review his original application
(AC94-08343) to correct his records to show that he was retired as a command sergeant major (CSM) (E-9). He requests that his records be corrected to reflect his many years of service in the capacity of a CSM.
8. The Board did not address the issue of his rank title, on the Retired List, in the decisional document of its prior review although, at that time, the applicant specifically requested that he be shown as a CSM (E-9). The Board corrected his record to show he retired a sergeant major (E-9).
9. The applicant’s records show that he was first promoted to and held the position of CSM in October 1962 and continued in this position until he was appointed a warrant officer in June 1964.
10. He reverted to enlisted status (E-9) in April 1969 and was again assigned to the position of command sergeant major. He held the CSM rank and position in the Mississippi National Guard until he transferred to a state Active Guard Reserve (AGR) position in December 1980.
11. The applicant remained in an AGR status for three and a half years before reverting to a drill status in June 1984. The record does not show what position he held from this point until he was placed on the Retired List in August 1992.
THE BOARD ADDITIONALLY CONCLUDES:
4. In view of the additional factors, it is in the interest of justice to recognize the applicant’s long years of service in the rank and position of CSM and correct his records to show he was placed on the Retired List as a CSM.
5. In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to further correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be further corrected by amending the Board’s recommendation appearing in the proceedings, dated 28 September 1994, AC94-08343 to show that the individual concerned was placed on the Retired List as a command sergeant major (E-9).
BOARD VOTE:
__FNE___ __TBR__ __DPH__ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
_ Fred N. Eichorn_____
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2001063261 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020305 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 129.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001337
TAG established the selection objectives for the CY 2013 Enlisted ASMB by MOS, electing to release three 11Zs from the AGR program. The applicant was among those selected. TAG now states had he known the applicant was enrolled in the SGM Academy he would have exempted him from the ASMB.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086018C070212
There are no orders or other documents on file in the applicant’s MPRJ that indicate that any formal relief for cause or involuntary release from the CSM program actions were taken by the proper authority, or that orders were published revoking the applicant’s CSM appointment prior to his retirement. Thus, it concludes that his records should be corrected to show he held the rank of CSM on the date of release from active duty for retirement and that he was placed on the Retired List in the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026346
b. paragraph 543 states enlisted standby advisory boards will consider records of Soldiers on whom derogatory information has been properly substantiated, which may warrant removal from a selection list. c. paragraph 5-35 states a Soldier removed from a promotion selection list and later considered exonerated will be reinstated on the promotion selection list. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: * Setting...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006033
The applicant requests his DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 12 June 2007, be corrected to show he has reappointment rights as a Command Sergeant Major (CSM). Paragraph 5-27a(3) stated that a CSM who was reclassified as a SGM under paragraph 5-20c and was transferred to the Retired Reserve on completion of a stabilized period of assignment as a CSM had reappointment rights to CSM. Evidence of record shows the applicant served in a CSM position for 14 months prior to being reassigned...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078622C070215
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The evidence of record shows that the applicant was not selected for appointment to CSM while he was still on active duty, and that he was placed on the Retired List in the rank title of SGM in accordance with the applicable law and regulations in effect at the time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019302
The applicant requests reconsideration of his previous request for retroactive promotion to command sergeant major (CSM)/E-9 in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR). The applicant provides: * Self-authored statement and 4 self-authored notes * List of qualifications and accomplishments * Two letters from the Sergeants Major Academy, dated 11 October 1991 and 17 October 1991 * Memorandum of request for promotion consideration to sergeant major (SGM), undated * Order Number 296-00053, dated 23...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059124C070421
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be advanced to the rank and pay grade of command sergeant major/E-9 (CSM/E-9) on the Retired List. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: However, the available evidence in this case contains no indication that the applicant was ever recommended or selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-9 by a DA promotion board or that he was placed on the E-9 promotion standing list prior to his being REFRAD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026078
As a new argument the applicant states: * The State of South Carolina Military Department provided the Army Board of Correction for Military Records (ABCMR) erroneous information * The ABCMR improperly interpreted the intent of an agreement between him and the State * The ABCMR violated its own regulation in overturning a correct decision 3. On 23 October 2009, the applicant submitted a rebuttal statement to the advisory opinion and he indicated that, in accordance with Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074022C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was not selected for appointment to CSM while he was still on active duty, and that he was placed on the Retired List in the rank of SGM in accordance with the applicable law and regulations in effect at the time. Therefore, the Board finds no injustice related to the applicant’s assigned retired rank title and is compelled...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005924C070206
He based his request on the fact that two of the NCOs selected in his MOS were selected even through they were not graduates of the USASMA, and because he believed two of the promotion board members were biased against his selection. This RC promotion official states that promotion selection boards are governed by Army regulatory policy, and members are selected for their maturity, judgment and freedom from bias. While the applicant clearly believes he is better qualified than the Soldiers...