| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti | Analyst |
| Mr. Luther L. Santiful | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Curtis L. Greenway | Member | |
| Mr. Ronald J. Weaver | Member |
2. The applicant requests that Order Number 364-00219 dated 30 December 1997 be removed from his military records. In a supplemental request, the applicant requests that if the Board grants his request to delete this order, that he be given promotion reconsideration to pay grade E-7.
3. The applicant states that the contested order revoked Order Number
356-00201, which was an order which was published in error due to a power surge (computer generated orders). He believes that this order revocation could be confusing to promotion boards, especially since the revocation references his promotion to the rank of staff sergeant. He has just been notified that he has been considered for promotion to pay grade E-7 and not selected. He believes that he was not selected for promotion because of the contested order.
4. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 July 1986 and was honorably released from active duty at the expiration of his term of service on 7 July 1989.
5. The applicant then served in an Army Reserve unit until his reenlistment in the Regular Army on 11 May 1993.
6. He has served continuously on active duty since that reenlistment, being promoted to pay grade E-6. He has an excellent performance record, with most of his noncommissioned officer evaluation reports (NCOER’s) being extremely laudatory.
7. Army Regulation 640-10, Paragraph 4-4, states that once a document is placed in a soldier’s OMPF, the document will not be removed or moved to another section of the OMPF unless approved by appropriate authority. This Board is listed as having the authority to remove from, or move documents in, a soldier’s OMPF.
8. Army Regulation 600-200 outlines the policies and procedures for the promotion of enlisted personnel. Chapter 7, in pertinent part, specifies that promotion reconsideration is authorized when a material error exists in a soldiers OMPF when it is reviewed by the promotion board. A material error is, in effect, an error which would have reasonably provided a basis for the soldier not to have been selected for promotion.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. Since an erroneous promotion order was published, it had to be revoked. Such revocations are filed in the affected soldier’s OMPF.
2. However, the applicant has an excellent military record and has been passed over for promotion to pay grade E-7. This scenario brings into question whether the revocation order did, in fact, act as a “flag” to the promotion board. Promotions in the Army are highly competitive, and any document which could indicate a potential flaw in the candidate could cause a promotion board not to select the individual.
3. As such, the Board is of the opinion that it would be in the interest of justice to both remove the revocation of the erroneous promotion order, and to give the applicant promotion reconsideration to pay grade E-7.
4. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by:
a. removing Order Number 364-00219 dated 30 December 1997 from the OMPF of the individual concerned; and
b. having him reconsidered for promotion to pay grade E-7.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
__________Luther L. Santiful______
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2003084709 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030805 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 134.00 |
| 2. | 131.00 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040002762C070208
A 15 July 2002 memorandum, the document which the applicant is asking to be removed from his file, states that the applicant’s name was administratively removed from the promotion list based on his “release from ANCOC due to [his] failure to meet the standards of AR [Army Regulation] 600-9.” Army Regulation 600-9 established the Army’s Weight Control Program. Although the applicant has requested that the 15 July 2002 memorandum notifying him of his removal from ANCOC be expunged from his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010719C070205
The Promotions Branch requested to have the order expunged from the applicant's records and the request was denied, based on the fact that the Records Management Office was not authorized to remove a document once it had been filed on the OMPF. The evidence of record shows the applicant was issued Order Number 10- 32, dated 10 January 2002, promoting him to SFC, pay grade E-7. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080000585C080213
Records at the AGR Branch, USAHRC STL show that the applicant was considered but not selected for promotion by the 2001, 2002, and 2003 AGR E-7 promotion boards. Army Regulation 140-158 (Enlisted Personnel Classification, Promotion, and Reduction), in effect at the time, paragraph 1-8e, stated that, when orders are published revoking an advancement or promotion, the Soldier's service in the higher grade may be determined to have been de facto so as to allow the Soldier to retain pay and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077532C070215
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The applicant requests that all documents related to the revocation of his promotion to the pay grade of E-7 be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The applicant’s military records show that on 24 July 1998, the applicant's name was released as a selectee for promotion to the pay grade of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012177C070205
The applicant states, in effect, the denial of his request for reconsideration of his case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) by the Board staff was inappropriate and that he has submitted two prior claims to the Board for consideration in July 2005 and again in April 2006. During its review of the applicant's case, the Board found that the applicant was conditionally promoted to SFC/E-7 contingent upon his completion of the Advance Noncommissioned Officer Course...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050014653C070206
The applicant states, in effect, that he was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 in 2001 and before he could attend the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course (ANCOC) he injured his shoulder and could not attend the course. Army Regulation 600-8-19, Enlisted Promotions and Reductions, provides, in pertinent part, that Soldiers who fail to successfully complete, fail to remain eligible to be scheduled or attend, who are denied enrollment in, or who do not attend their scheduled NCOES class...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067371C070402
The applicant requests that Orders Number C-103-179, which promoted him to the rank of sergeant (SGT)/pay grade E-5 effective 18 April 1991 (sic), be removed from his Official Military Personnel Files (OMPF). The opinion states that, although the promotion boards do not see the portion of the OMPF where the promotion orders are filed, it appears that the applicant's promotion to SGT and subsequent revocation to his promotion were of no fault by the soldier. Records show that Orders Number...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085330C070212
Counsel states that the applicant was unlawfully non-selected for promotion to LTC by two Standby Advisory Boards (STAB) convening in December 2000 and May 2001 under 1998 and 1999 criteria, when the Army Reserve Personnel Command (AR-PERSCOM) failed to properly expunge derogatory documents from his official military personnel file (OMPF) microfiche. The applicant appealed to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) on 1 August 1995 to be retained on active duty as an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016048
After cancelling his orders they revoked that PCS award because he was there for another year. On 16 April 2009, DISA published Military Personnel Awards Orders Number 2009-043 awarding the applicant the DMSM for meritorious service from 12 December 2003 to 21 July 2009, by reason of "PCS." The original order (2009-043) awarding him the DMSM (2009-043) is not filed in his OMPF; however, the revocation order (2009-107) is filed in the performance folder of his OMPF.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050012469C070206
He appealed the AER to the Enlisted Special Review Board (ESRB), which resulted in the ESRB finding the AER was in error and removing the AER from his records. The applicant was promoted to SFC on 1 June 2002 conditional upon his successfully completing ANCOC. The applicant appealed the AER and the ESRB granted his appeal to remove the AER.