| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Lee Cates | Analyst |
| Ms. Jennifer L. Prater | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member | |
| Mr. Thomas Lanyl | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be retroactively promoted to pay grade E-7.
APPLICANT STATES: That he believes he suffered an unjust act of not being promoted. He was promoted to pay grade E-6 on 7 July 1986 and nearly 13 years later retired in the same grade. He has never refused any assignments, where the Army sent him he went. He visited his branch manager and he indicated that he didn’t see any reason that he shouldn’t be promoted. He would like to know what was so wrong with him or his records that he couldn’t be promoted, but the soldiers he trained could.
He indicates that he understands the Centralized Promotion System and that it is not intended to reward for long honorable service in the present rank, but is based on demonstrated performance in the present rank and potential ability at the higher rank. He lists his military assignments, awards, efficiency, service and education. He provided a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), dated 30 April 1999, a copy of his DA Form 2A (Personnel Qualification Record), dated 26 August 1998, a copy of an NCO Evaluation Data Report used by the Sergeant First Class (SFC) Promotion Board, dated 26 September 1997 and a Certificate of Recognition from the Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics and The Quartermaster General for the Supply Excellence Award.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's available military records show:
During the period 1 February to 2 April 1979, he served in the Army Reserve Delayed Enlistment Program.
On 3 April 1979, he enlisted in the Army with a moral waiver. He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 92Y (Unit Supply Specialist).
On 7 July 1986, he was promoted to pay grade E-6.
The applicant was considered but not selected by each SFC Promotion Board from 1988 until his retirement.
On 30 April 1999, he was honorably separated in pay grade E-6 under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 12, based on sufficient service for retirement. He was transferred to the Retired Reserve on 1 May 1999. His DD Form 214 indicates he had 20 years and 28 days of creditable service.
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 evidence of record shows the applicant was considered but not selected for promotion on 11 occasions. The board does not disclose the reason for non-selection and he has not shown he was not fairly considered or that his records contained material error when reviewed by the promotion boards.
2. The applicant states that his branch manager didn’t see any reason that he shouldn’t be promoted; however, he provides no evidence of this counseling.
3. The Board does not dispute that he may have a competitive record, however, it notes that, as shown in this case, promotion is not automatic based on qualifications alone, but includes a competitive process of a promotion board determining an individual’s potential and ability to perform at the higher grade, and the needs of the service. Particularly pertinent is this case is that with keen competition for promotion, many noncommissioned officers will not be selected.
4. 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
5. 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
_jlp___ _bje__ _ _tl__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002067969 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020610 |
| 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 | CY2011 | 20110010831
Having had prior active enlisted service from 2 August 1965 to 1 August 1968 and 13 January 1970 to 18 May 1974 (he was discharged as a specialist five (SP5)/E5), the applicant's records show he enlisted in the Massachusetts ARNG (MAARNG) on 8 March 1979 for 3 years in the rank/grade of SGT/E-5. Title 10, USC, section 3963 (Highest grade held satisfactorily: Reserve enlisted member reduced in grade not as a result of the member's misconduct) states a Reserve enlisted member of the Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007023
The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows his rank/grade as SSG/E-6 and that he completed 20 years and 3 days of active service. Promotions to E-7, E-8, and E-8 were (and continue to be) centralized at the Department of the Army Level via annual promotion boards that select Soldiers for advancement to the next higher grade. Since the applicant was not selected for promotion by a promotion board, he is not entitled to promotion.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9706918
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant’s military records show:After prior Army service, he reenlisted in the Regular Army on 23 September 1959. He stated that DA Message 282226Z May 70 was preceded by another letter authorizing local commands to promote all E-6s presently on local promotion lists to E-7 prior to DA taking over the promotions to this grade. The cited DA message was clear that local promotions to SFC were frozen effective 1 June 1970 so those soldiers on local lists could be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9706918C070209
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicants military records show: After prior Army service, he reenlisted in the Regular Army on 23 September 1959. He stated that DA Message 282226Z May 70 was preceded by another letter authorizing local commands to promote all E-6s presently on local promotion lists to E-7 prior to DA taking over the promotions to this grade. The cited DA message was clear that local promotions to SFC were frozen effective 1 June 1970 so those soldiers on local lists could be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130017795
This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. His DA Form 2-1 indicates in block 5 (Assignment Consideration): * he was not recommended for further service on 13 June 1986 * he had been removed from the SFC/E-7 Selection list * his bar to reenlistment was reviewed and it was not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060100C070421
On 20 December 1989, a panel of this Board denied the applicant’s request to have his records corrected to show he was promoted to the pay grade of E-9, effective 1 March 1983. In effect, this decision was based on the fact that the Board disagreed with the ARPERSCOM position that there was no evidence to show the applicant was reduced to SFC/E-7 at the time he voluntarily entered active duty in that rank and pay grade. Further, there is no evidence contained in the record that shows that...
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 | CY2010 | 20100011163
These orders show the applicant's retired grade as SFC with a date of rank of 1 April 1995. Based on the evidence of record, the applicant was conditionally promoted to SFC/E-7 with the understanding that he was required to complete ANCOC to validate and maintain his promotion. __________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 | CY2011 | 20110021691
Orders D41-11, dated 1 March 2001, show that on 1 March 2001 he was removed from the TDRL and permanently retired the following day in the grade of rank of SSG/E-6. The evidence of record shows the applicant was selected for promotion to SFC with a sequence number of "2" prior to his placement on the TDRL on 25 June 1997. However, he is entitled to correction of his retirement orders to show he was placed on the retired list on 26 June 1997, in the grade of E-7.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005159
The command imposed nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on the applicant under Article 15 of the UCMJ. That form would have been available for use at the time the applicant was purportedly punished under Article 15. There is no evidence of record and neither the applicant nor counsel have provided sufficient evidence to show the DA Form 2627 contained in his record is untrue or unjust or that the applicant was improperly imposed punishment under Article 15.