RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 28 September 2004
DOCKET NUMBER: AR2004100108
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 |
| |Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti | |Analyst |
The following members, a quorum, were present:
| |Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | |Chairperson |
| |Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher | |Member |
| |Mr. Ronald E. Blakely | |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 the corrected copy of his DA Form 1059,
Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER), for the Army Medical
Department Noncommissioned Officer Basic Course (BNCOC) held from 11 July
to 27 August 2002, be substituted for the original now contained in his
Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).
2. The applicant states the original DA Form 1059 did not reflect the fact
that he was given the Commandant’s Physical Fitness Certificate while
attending the course. Since the award was mentioned in his Noncommissioned
Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER), he is concerned that the discrepancy may
adversely affect his chances for promotion.
3. The applicant provides a print out of e-mails which show that he has
attempted to administratively have the AER in his OMPF replaced by the new
AER.
4. The applicant also submits a copy of the “corrected” AER. In item 16,
Comments, of the AER, it states, “Received the Commandant’s Physical
Fitness Certificate for attaining 291 on the Army Physical Fitness Test.”
The applicant also submits a copy of the certificate referenced in the
“corrected” AER.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army in pay grade E-4 on 13 May
1994. He was promoted to pay grade E-6 and awarded the military
occupational specialty of senior dental sergeant.
2. The applicant was given an AER for his attendance at the Army Medical
Department BNCOC held from 11 July to 27 August 2002. This AER does not
mention the applicant being given the Commandant’s Physical Fitness
Certificate while attending the course. This AER is filed in the
applicant’s OMPF.
3. On 4 April 2003, the applicant was given an NCOER for the period
covering April 2002 through March 2003. That NCOER does not contain any
comment on the applicant being given the Commandant’s Physical Fitness
Certificate while attending BNCOC. The report does mention that the
applicant scored 291 points on the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) during
that rating period.
4. A review of the applicant’s performance fiche in his OMPF shows that,
with the exception of his first three NCOERs, his APFT score has been
recorded on all of his NCOERs.
5. AR 623-1 prescribes the policy on AER’s. Paragraph 1-11 of this
regulation states that only enclosures authorized in this regulation will
be submitted with an academic report. The items below will not be
included.
a. letters of appreciation;
b. letters of commendation;
c. certificates of achievement;
d. recommendation for awards; and
e. records of punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of
Military Justice.
6. Paragraph 1–12, Submission of an addendum, states that if the rating
officials become aware of information that would have resulted in a lower
evaluation of the rated individual they will submit an addendum to the
previous report and refer it to the student for comments/acknowledgment.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. It is unclear how the altered AER came into being. The altered AER is
not marked as a corrected copy.
2. Statements concerning certificates of achievement given during a class
are not required to be entered in an AER. To the contrary, certificates of
achievement are prohibited to be submitted with an AER.
3. There are no provisions to place an addendum with an AER, unless it is
to record adverse information.
4. Contrary to the applicant’s statement, there is no mention of a
certificate of achievement for his APFT on the NCOER covering the period in
question. While his APFT score is recorded on that NCOER, his APFT score
is recorded on all but his first three NCOERs. Therefore, there is no
disparity between the applicant’s NCOER and his AER.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
____fne _ ____reb _ ___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.
_________Fred N. Eichorn_____________
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR2004100108 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON |YYYYMMDD |
|DATE BOARDED |20040928 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE |YYYYMMDD |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |AR . . . . . |
|DISCHARGE REASON | |
|BOARD DECISION |DENY |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
|ISSUES 1. | |
|2. | |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
-----------------------
[pic]
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003504
The applicant states, in effect: * he sustained injuries to his collarbone and knee about 3 years before attending ANCOC [sic, ANCOC attendance was 4 years and 5 months after injury occurred; injury in June 2004, ANCOC in December 2008] * it resulted from a malicious act of another, for which he was awarded $30,000.00 * he was a recruiter at the time and, because he was 6 hours from the nearest military installation, he was never able to have his injuries evaluated for a profile by a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006997
The applicant requests correction of item 11 (Performance Summary) of his DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER)), dated 26 June 2009, herein referred to as the contested AER, to show "Achieved Course Standards" instead of "Marginally Achieved Course Standards." c. Field Manual 7-22 (Army Physical Readiness Training) clearly states that Soldiers recovering from injury, illness, or other medical conditions must train within the limits of their medical profiles (DA Form...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002368
He provides: * his Enlisted Record Brief * a DA Form 1059 showing he "achieved course standards" * a DA Form 1059 showing he "exceeded course standards" * a self-authored memorandum to the Board * an Army Medical Department (AMEDD) NCO Academy memorandum, subject: Commandant's List * a recognition ceremony announcement containing a Commandant's List for BNCOC Class 001-06 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. In connection with the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087464C070212
The applicant requests that the DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER)), dated 19 October 2000, [herein identified as the "contested AER"] be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The evidence of record shows the applicant was promoted to the rank of staff sergeant effective 19 December 2001. That so much of the application as it relates to complete removal of the contested AER be denied.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091588C070212
The applicant requests, in effect, that the DA Form 1059, Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER), dated 9 August 1996, be expunged from her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The applicant's AER, for the period 15 July 1996 through 9 August 1996, shows a forwarding address for a unit in Korea. The applicant in her response and acknowledgement to the notification under the provisions of Title 10, US Code 1556 stated that she had tried for 6 years to get the erroneous DA Form...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013608
The applicant requests item 11 (Performance Summary) of a DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) for the period 9 July 2008 through 18 December 2008 be corrected to show he achieved course standards; or, the DA Form 1059 in its entirety be removed from his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) (formerly known as the Official Military Personnel File). He provides a DA Form 3349 which shows he was issued a temporary profile for left meniscus tear on 24 December 2008. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062173C070421
The ESRB opined that the applicant did not meet the entry requirements for the course because he failed the APFT (2-mile run) due to an injury. Given the evidence in this case, the Board finds that the applicant should have been released from the course for medical reasons that occurred through no fault of his own and that any AER that was issued should have accurately reflected the events that occurred in his case. This is further supported by the fact that the applicant has always...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002968
Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/ Records) prescribes the policies governing the OMPF, the military personnel records jacket, the career management individual file, and Army personnel qualification records. Army Regulation 600-8-104, Table 2-1 states that DA Forms 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) will be filed in the performance section of the OMPF. The evidence of record supports his contention he tore the meniscus ligament in his left...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015921
The applicant requests, in effect, amendment of the DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER)), dated 18 August 2006, that is filed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The rater documented the applicant's academic performance average for ANCOC of 95.8% and that he passed the APFT on 6 August 2006 in item 14 of the DA Form 1059. The rater also provided comments in item 14 of the DA Form 1059 about the applicant's leadership capabilities and overall...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150007472
The applicant requests correction of his DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER)) for the Basic Officer Leader Course (BOLC) (hereafter referred to as the contested AER) in item 11c (Performance Summary) "Marginally Achieved Course Standards" dated 24 January 2007, to either: a. Annotate the DA Form 1059 as a Satisfactory Achieved Course Standards and redact/remove the final line about the failed the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT); or b. The evidence of record...