| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Maria C. Sanchez | Analyst |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs | Member | |
| Mr. Jose A. Martinez | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be promoted to the pay grade of E-6.
APPLICANT STATES: That he has been performing the duties in the primary military occupational specialty (PMOS) of Avionic Mechanic (68N0) since May 1996 and has been on the Army’s promotion list in good standings. He states that he has received orders to attend Kiowa Warrior Electrician Course to obtain a new identifier (W-5). He states, in effect, that a message was published notifying all Avionic Mechanic that the identifiers would be converted to Kiowa Warrior Electrician (68S) and that the conversion would be effective in September 2000. He goes on to state that he did not obtain his identifier until October 2000; however, during the month of February 2001, the promotion list was published promoting all Avionic Mechanics who had met the cut off scores, he being one of them. He states that on 1 March 2001, the promotion date for all soldiers that had met the cut off scores were promoted; however, he didn’t received any orders nor was he on the promotion list. He states that he inquired through his chain of command regarding his promotion status since he had not been classified in the 68S MOS and then he inquired thru his post IG about his promotion; however, the results were negative. He concludes by stating that he has served the United States Government and it’s military component in the United States Army faithfully for over 15 years and he feels that he was done unjustly on his just due promotion.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant initially enlisted in the United States Army Reserves (USAR) under the Delayed Entry Program in August 1986. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 November 1986, for a period of 4 years in the pay grade of E-1. He successfully completed his training as an observation airplane repairer (67H10). He remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments. He was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 January 1991.
Orders were published on 31 May 1995, awarding the applicant a 68N PMOS effective 15 May 1995; however on 16 January 2000, a MILPER message
00-132 (FY00 Military Occupational Classification and Structure (MOCS) Personnel Reclassification Actions) was issued directing that, effective 30 September 2000, selected personnel in MOS 68N, with the additional skill identifier (ASI) W5 would be converted to 68S.
On 27 June 2000, the applicant received amended orders, instructing him to attend the US Army Aviation Logistics School to take the Avionic Mechanic Course. He completed the course on 5 October 2000 and he was awarded a 68N PMOS with a W5 ASI.
On 7 March 2001, orders were published awarding him his new 68S PMOS with an effective date of 30 September 2000.
The applicant submitted copies of recommended promotion lists for the promotion of enlisted personnel, dated 1 February 2001, 2 March 2001 and October 2001, confirming that he was recommended for promotion to the rank and pay grade of SSG/E-6 and that he had attained 692 promotion points. He also submitted the Enlisted Promotion Cutoff Scores for March 2001 that verifies that the promotion point cutoff score for the applicant’s old PMOS (68N) was 602 points and his new PMOS (68S) was 798 points.
On 28 June 2001, United States Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) responded to an inquiry from a member of congress regarding the applicant’s promotion eligibility. PERSCOM’s letter states that the conversion was required based on the Army force structure change and those soldiers that were erroneously promoted in the 68N PMOS, had their promotions revoked based on the 68N PMOS conversion to 68S. In the letter PERSCOM apologized for the confusion that existed with the action and informed the member of congress that the applicant was not eligible for promotion as a 68N.
Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) prescribes the Army’s enlisted promotion policy. Chapter 3 contains guidance on semi-centralized promotions to sergeant (SGT/E-5) and staff sergeant (SSG/E-6). It states, in pertinent part, that soldiers mandatorily reclassified into a PMOS will compete for promotion in the new PMOS on the first day of the second month following reclassification. It also states, that once a solider is reclassified, he or she can no longer compete in the old PMOS.
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. According to PERSCOM, the conversion was required based on the Army force structure change and those soldiers that were erroneously promoted in the 68N PMOS, had their promotions revoked based on the 68N PMOS conversion to 68S. The letter from PERSCOM to the member of congress clearly states that as a result of his conversion he was not eligible to compete for promotion in the 68N PMOS. Additionally, the applicant competed for promotion in the 68S PMOS and he failed to meet the cutoff score.
3. While the Board understands the applicant’s desire to be promoted, it would be inappropriate for the Board to promote the applicant above his peers, when they did not get promoted due to the conversion.
4. Accordingly, since there is no indication that he was unjustly denied consideration for promotion and since there is no evidence to suggest that he was in fact selected for promotion, there is no basis for approving the applicant’s request.
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
__dj ____ ____jam _ __mm___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002075829 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/05/20 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 310 | 131.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071280C070402
On 30 June 1995, the effective date of the MOS conversion, the applicant was reclassified into MOS 31R20P7. The applicant met all these requirements at the time of the MOS conversion and should have been converted to MOS 31S with the ASI of Y2 at that time. In view of the facts of this case, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate at this time to correct the effective date of the applicant’s reclassification into MOS 31S to 30 June 1995.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001574
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 September 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120001574 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show his primary military occupational specialty (MOS) as 35K (Avionics Mechanic). His DD Form 214 correctly shows his PMOS as 35L2O; therefore, there is no basis to correct his DD Form 214.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069664C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Military Personnel Message Number 99-164 issued 1 June 1999 provided that, effective 1 June 1999, promotable soldiers in the rank of SGT who met a cutoff score will be conditionally promoted to SSG the date they met the cutoff score, provided otherwise eligible. Promotable soldiers in the rank of SGT that were currently on the monthly SGT/SSG promotion selection name list...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066582C070402
This office recommended that the applicant’s request to adjust his date of rank and effective date for promotion to SSG from 7 September 2000 to 1 June 1999, be denied. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded: The applicant was conditionally promoted to the rank of SSG/pay grade E-6 with a date of rank and effective date...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005265
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant provides a DA Form 4651-R, dated 2 June 1999; Army Reserve Personnel Command (ARPC) Form 3725-E (Army Reserve Status and Address Verification), dated March 2000; copy of Senator Jack Reed's letter to BG J__ G. T_____, Jr., Office of the Chief of Legislative Liaison, dated 27 August 2001; copy of a local newspaper interview, dated 24 September 2001; copy of letter to Sergeant Major of...
CG | BCMR | Advancement and Promotion | 2004-101
APPLICANT’S ALLEGATIONS The applicant stated that in March 2001, because he was not “above the cut” on the CWO final eligibility list, he was not certain whether he would be appointed. The applicant alleged that if he had known that he would not be able to re-compete for CWO for five years, he would not have had his name removed from the list. If the Coast Guard applied a five-year penalty for removing one’s name from the CWO final eligibility list without warning its members, the Board...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018079
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty): * amend the primary military occupational specialty (PMOS) shown in item 11 (Primary Specialty) from 68W3O (Health Care Specialist) to 68W3OM6 (Health Care Specialist with additional skill identifier (ASI) for practical/vocational nurse) * change the years and months shown for his PMOS * remove the entry in item 14 (Military Education) showing attendance at Practical Nurse...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067430C070402
Orders 204-06, dated 23 July 2001, promoted the applicant to the pay grade E-6, with an effective date and date of rank of 19 July 2001, in MOS 97B. On 20 September 2001, a legal review determined that, in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-19, the applicant met the requirements for granting de facto status concerning his erroneous promotion to pay grade E-6. The applicant was erroneously promoted to pay grade E-6 on 19 July 2001, and his records should be corrected to show his correct...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001053852C070420
The USAPDA stated that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding of unfit, and that the applicant had experienced back pain and sufficiently performed duties since 1996 with no significant worsening of his pain. It stated that his medical condition had been present since 1996, that his condition had been considered mild with little change, and that he had continued to perform his duties. He stated that his condition was not mild, and that his physical activities have been...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002288
The applicant requests correction of his military records to show he was promoted to staff sergeant (SSG) with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 June 2011. The message states, in part, Brigade/Battalion S-1 and Unit HR Specialists will assist Soldiers with updating their personnel records through the electronic Military Personnel Office (eMILPO) system and update training records through the S3/G3 Army Training Requirements and Resources System (ATTRS) Representative. His request did not warrant a...