| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Melinda M. Darby | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected to show he was promoted to Sergeant (SGT), E-5 with an effective date of 1 December 2000.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was recommended for promotion to SGT on 3 October 2000. He met the cut off score for promotion effective 1 December 2000. He was hospitalized due to a severe head injury from 23 November through 14 December 2000. He was placed on convalescent leave from 14 February through 4 September 2001. His command at Fort Stewart, GA lost his records and his promotion packet. They were found and sent to his new unit at Fort Knox, KY about two weeks prior to his discharge. He was denied promotion due to not meeting the service remaining requirement. Supporting evidence is as listed on the DD Form 149.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 August 1995. He was promoted to Specialist, E-4 on 10 October 1997.
The applicant appeared before a SGT promotion board on 3 October 2000.
A 15 November 2000 memorandum from the Fort Stewart, GA Personnel Management Officer to the applicant’s unit notified his unit that the applicant met or exceeded the announced cutoff score for promotion to SGT for 1 December 2001. However, it appeared he had not completed the Primary Leadership Development Course (PLDC) and so could not be promoted. He was requested to provided the Academic Evaluation Report, DA Form 1059, if he had completed PLDC so promotion orders could be issued. If he had not completed PLDC, every effort should be made to ensure he completed that requirement as soon as possible. He would then be promoted effective upon his graduation from PLDC.
On 23 November 2000, the applicant was injured in an automobile accident and hospitalized at a military treatment facility from 23 November through 20 December 2000 and in a Department of Veterans Affairs facility from 20 December 2000 through 14 February 2001. He was on convalescent leave from 14 February through 4 September 2001 after which he reported to the U. S. Army Medical Department Holding Detachment, Fort Knox, KY.
On 8 December 2001, the applicant was discharged by reason of a physical disability and placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List on 9 December 2001 with a 40 percent disability rating.
In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Promotions Branch, U. S. Total Army Personnel Command. That office recommended disapproval of the applicant’s request. It noted that the applicant was not fully qualified for promotion on 1 December 2000 because he did not meet the noncommissioned officer education system (NCOES) requirement for promotion. Additionally, once the decision was made to medically retire the applicant he became ineligible for promotion.
A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment or rebuttal. He did not respond within the given time frame.
Army Regulation 600-8-19 prescribes the enlisted promotions and reductions function of the military personnel system. Chapter 3 discusses semi-centralized promotions to SGT and Staff Sergeant, E-6. Paragraph 3-11 discusses eligibility criteria for recommendation and for promotion. Table 3-3, recommendation criteria, does not require a specific military education level for recommendation for promotion to SGT. Table 3-4, promotion criteria, requires completion of resident PLDC or higher for promotion to SGT. Paragraph 3-31 discusses rules for removing a soldier from a recommended list. Subparagraph 3-31b(4)(c) provides that a soldier will be immediately removed from a recommended list when undergoing proceedings that may result in discharge. Soldiers processing for medical evaluation will remain on the recommended list unless separated. Paragraph 3-39a states that the service remaining requirement is 6 months for promotion to SGT.
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. 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.
2. There is no evidence of record and the applicant provides none to show he completed PLDC, a requirement for promotion to SGT, prior to the date he met the cutoff score for promotion to SGT, 1 December 2000. Unfortunately, he was severely injured on 23 November 2000, preventing his future attendance at PLDC. He was not eligible for promotion on 1 December 2000 and he was properly removed from the recommended promotion list upon his physical disability retirement.
3. Regrettably, 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
__inw___ __mmd___ __jtm___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001066094 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020416 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 131.00 |
| 2. | 131.02 |
| 3. | 131.04 |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080002192
The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected to reflect that he was promoted to the rank of sergeant, effective 1 May 2003. The regulation in effect on May 2003 provided, in pertinent part, conditional promotions for Soldiers who have met a cutoff score and are otherwise qualified, but have not completed PLDC, are authorized to be promoted (when approved by the promotion authority) when they are reflected on the OML for PLDC attendance, when they are operationally...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9610726C070209
Paragraph 3-18j states, in effect, that the promotion packet of a soldier on the recommended list will be kept in the soldiers records and a copy in the promotions section until the soldier is promoted. The applicant met the cutoff score for promotion to pay grade E-5 on 1 July 1996. 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 pay grade E-5 effective and with a date of rank of 1...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040009448C070208
On 22 June 2004, the HRC approved a request for exception to policy to reinstate the applicant's name to the promotion selection by-name-list and to subsequently promote him to SGT, with a retroactive DOR and effective date of 1 January 2004, granted he was otherwise eligible. Soldiers were allowed to compete for promotion to SGT, but could not be promoted to SGT until completion of PLDC. Had he not been erroneously removed, he would have been promoted to SGT in MOS 96B prior to being...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140021463
The applicant requests correction of his record to show he was promoted to sergeant (SGT)/E-5 and that his military occupational specialty (MOS) be changed from 95B1O (Military Police-Basic) to 95B2O (Military Police-Supervisor). When the promotion authority approves a conditional promotion, he must state that the Soldier is otherwise fully eligible and will attend PLDC within 12 months of promotion or prior to the individuals expiration of term of service (ETS), whichever occurs first. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082313C070215
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 to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The evidence of record...
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 | 9610255C070209
She attended the following class, and was promoted on 7 December 1995, the graduation date of that class. Notwithstanding the opinion from the PERSCOM official, the applicant could not have requested a waiver of the BNCOC requirement prior to her promotion because there was no need to do so - she was unaware that she had been scheduled for the May 1995 class until after she had been promoted. RECOMMENDATION: That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016992
The applicant states at the time of his application he was in the medical evaluation board (MEB) process. The applicant provides: * U.S. Army Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), Fort Sam Houston, TX Memorandum for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), dated 17 April 2013 * Human Resources Command (HRC) Memorandum for U.S. Army, Promotion Work Centers, dated 18 April 2013, subject: Department of the Army Promotion Point Cutoff Scores for 1 May 2013 and Junior Enlisted Issues for the Active...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100780C070208
Jonathon K. Rost | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. This HRC promotion official states the applicant had not completed the PLDC requirement for promotion to SGT on 1 April 2003 and the promotion authority did not authorize his conditional promotion at that time. It further states that soldiers who have met a cut-off score and are otherwise qualified, but have not completed PLDC may be conditionally promoted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120014904
The applicant requests: * correction of his Enlisted Record Brief (ERB) to reflect the correct date and number of promotion points to sergeant (SGT)/E-5 * retroactive promotion to SGT/E-5 with a date of rank (DOR) and effective date of 1 June 2011 2. However, as of 1 May 2011, the applicant was recorded as having 562 promotion points. Therefore, he cannot be promoted.