RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 7 June 2005
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20040005421
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.
| |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | |Director |
| |Ms. Prevolia Harper | |Analyst |
The following members, a quorum, were present:
| |Mr. William D. Powers | |Chairperson |
| |Mr. Kenneth L. Wright | |Member |
| |Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher | |Member |
The Board considered the following evidence:
Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.
Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that a memorandum pertaining to her declination
of a conditional promotion to Sergeant First Class (SFC/E-7) be removed
from the restricted portion of her Official Military Personnel Records
(OMPF).
2. The applicant states that she declined a conditional promotion to SFC
in 2001. She further states that, as a result, a memorandum concerning
this action was filed in the restricted portion of her OMPF.
3. The applicant contends that this memorandum is the reason she has not
been promoted to SFC and should be expunged from her records because it
could potentially damage her career.
4. The applicant provides no documents in support of her application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 September 1986 and has
served continuously on active duty since that time.
2. She was promoted to Staff Sergeant (SSG/E-6) with a date of rank of 1
May 1997.
3. The applicant was selected for conditional promotion to SFC by the
August 2001 Department of the Army Sergeant First Class Selection Board.
4. In September 2001, the applicant declined promotion to SFC. The actual
memorandum submitted by the applicant requesting her removal from the SFC
promotion list is not in the available records and not provided by the
applicant.
5. On 24 September 2001, the Chief, Enlisted Promotions, Promotions
Branch, US Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) approved the applicant's
declination of promotion to SFC. The memorandum stated that the applicant
was considered and selected for promotion by the 23 August 2001 SFC
promotion board. The memorandum further stated that based on the
applicant's declination of promotion and mandatory reclassification, her
name was administratively removed from the promotion list.
6. Army Regulation 600-8-19 governs the enlisted promotions and reductions
function of the military personnel system. Paragraph 1-24b states that a
Soldier may submit a memorandum of declination any time after being
recommended for promotion. If the Soldier has been promoted, the
declination memorandum will be sent through command channels to the PSB not
later than 30 days after the effective date of promotion.
7. Paragraph 1-24f of Army Regulation 600-8-19 states that once the
declination for promotion is received by the promotion authority, the
declination is irrevocable and the effective date will be the date the
Soldier signed the declination of promotion.
8. Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/
Records) sets forth the policies, operating tasks and steps for governing
the OMPF; the Military Personnel Records Jacket; the Career Management
Individual File; Army Personnel Qualification Records; and Military
Personnel Information Management as a work category. Paragraph 2-4 of this
regulation states that once a document is placed in the OMPF it becomes a
permanent part of that file and will not be removed from that file or moved
to another part of the file unless directed by the ABCMR; the Department of
the Army Suitability Evaluation Board; Army Appeals Board; Chief of Appeals
and Corrections Branch of the Total Army Personnel Command (currently known
as U.S. Army Human Resources Command-HRC); the OMPF custodian when
documents have been improperly filed, HRC (formerly Total Army Personnel
Command (TAPC-PDO-PO) as an exception; Chief of the Appeals Branch of the
Army Reserve Personnel Center; and Chief of the Appeals Branch of the
National Guard Personnel Center.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends that a memorandum pertaining to her declination
of a conditional promotion to SFC should be removed from the restricted
portion of her Official Military Personnel Records (OMPF).
2. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was conditionally
promoted to SFC by the 2001 Department of the Army SFC Selection Board.
Thereafter, she submitted a memorandum declining the promotion to SFC.
Subsequently, PERSCOM issued a memorandum to revoke the applicant's
promotion to SFC which was effective on 24 September 2001.
3. There is no evidence, and the applicant has provided no evidence, which
shows that the 24 September 2001 memorandum was used against her for
promotion purposes. The restricted portion of the applicant's OMPF would
not normally be provided to an E-7 or E-8 selection board and so should not
affect her chances for the next two promotions.
4. The Board finds no compelling evidence to support removal of the
memorandum from the applicant's restricted microfiche.
5. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with
her application or the evidence of record that an error or injustice exists
in her case.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__wdp___ __klw___ __kyf___ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.
William D. Powers
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR20040005421 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON | |
|DATE BOARDED |20050507 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
|DISCHARGE REASON | |
|BOARD DECISION |DENY |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
|ISSUES 1. |134.0200 |
|2. | |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
-----------------------
[pic]
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016778
The applicant requests, in effect, that the memorandum, subject: Administrative Removal from the Promotion Selection List, dated 22 December 1997, be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). He states that he did not attend ANCOC and a memorandum was placed in his OMPF. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by transferring the memorandum, subject: Administrative Removal from the Promotion...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081600C070215
The applicant requests, in effect, that the Memorandum, dated 6 June 2002, from the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) be removed from his Restricted Fiche of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). Therefore, the Board recommends that the Memorandum, dated 6 June 2002, which contains the words "declination of continued service" be expunged from the applicant's Restricted Fiche of his OMPF. The Board now recommends that the Memorandum, dated 6 June 2002, which contains the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040000806C070208
The appeal correspondence was directed to be placed in the applicant’s restricted fiche, and stated that promotion consideration was not applicable. Once placed in the OMPF, the document becomes a permanent part of that file and will not be removed from a fiche or moved to another part of the fiche unless directed by certain agencies, to include the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). The applicant's contention that the NCOER, even as corrected, would be damaging to her...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074854C070403
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that all documents relating to his request for correction/removal from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) of a Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER) for the period February 1994 through January 1995 be removed from the restricted portion (R-Fiche) of his OMPF; that the NCOERs on file in his record dating from 1 July 1996 be corrected to reflect service in the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class/E-7, (SFC/E-7), vice staff sergeant/E-6...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007366
Counsel requests the applicant be reinstated in the Drill Sergeant (DS) Program and all related documents, including her letter of reprimand (LOR), letter of removal from the DS Program, and relief-for-cause noncommissioned officer evaluation report (NCOER), be removed from her official military personnel file (OMPF) or moved to the restricted fiche. c. The applicant's LOR and removal from the DS Program were false and unjust. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was involved in a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015618
In support of her previous application, she provided an e-mail from HRC, dated 1 February 2012, stating HRC records showed she had been considered but not selected for promotion to MSG by the 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 MSG PSB's. In support of her previous application, she provided several statements regarding her complaints and documents related to outcomes of various investigations by several different Army agencies, including command and Department of the Army Headquarters (HQDA)...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605941C070209
A 20 November 1990 AER from the software analyst, MOS 74F, BNCOC at Fort Gordon, Georgia, shows that she was administratively released from the course because she failed written and hands-on portion [of the course], with a recommendation that she be allowed to work in her MOS before attending the course again. She stated, in effect, that because of overstrength in MOS 74F at Fort Gordon, she did not have the opportunity to work in that MOS, and coupled with the fact that she was recently...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050015739C070206
He states that future selection board members may see that he refused promotion to the pay grade of E-7 in the past and question why he should be promoted again. According to the Chief, Enlisted Promotions, Promotions Branch, United States Total Army Personnel Command, the applicant was considered and selected for promotion by the Sergeant First Class and Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Selection Board. Promotion boards for selection to the pay grades of E-7 and E-8 are not routinely...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060008764C070205
He hereby requests that the Board remove the negative NCOER from his "R" fiche, of his OMPF for the same reasons as he sent to the NCOER Appeal board. The administrative error was that the SR listed on the NCOER was not the officer that served in that position during the rating period. Second, he never saw the NCOER.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065032C070421
He requested that the OSRB change the senior rater profile block from the third to the second block on both reports and submit his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) for reconsideration for promotion to major. • He stated that the 1994 Board decision which resulted in the senior rater potential evaluation being removed from the OERs did not result in his promotion to lieutenant colonel, that he was passed over for promotion by the March 1998 board, that 73 percent of his peers were...