RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        4 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050000378


      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             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Mark D. Manning               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Larry C. Bergquist            |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carmen Duncan                 |     |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, in effect, promotion reconsideration to Master
Sergeant (MSG), E-8 under the 2001, 2002, and 2003 criteria.

2.  The applicant states he did not get a fair chance at being selected for
promotion because his Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reports (NCOERs)
and his award were not submitted to the U. S. Army Enlisted Records and
Evaluation Center (USAEREC).  His rating officials were to have sent the
evaluations upon his permanent change of station to Fort Carson, CO.  It
was not until he called the Sergeant Major of the Army that this situation
was corrected.  By that time, three promotion boards had passed.

3.  The applicant provides three NCOERs (for the periods ending November
2000, March 2001, and February 2002); an email from USAEREC dated
  6 December 2002; a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award) dated 12 March
2001; and Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) orders dated 15 August 2001.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 June 1983.  He was
promoted to Sergeant First Class (SFC), E-7 effective 1 November 1993.

2.  The applicant provided an annual NCOER for the period ending November
2000 that was signed by him, the rating officials, and the personnel
service battalion (PSB) on 17 January 2001; a change-of-rater NCOER for the
period ending March 2001 that was signed by him, the rating officials, and
the PSB on 12 November 2002; and an annual NCOER for the period ending
March 2002 that was signed by him, the rating officials, and the PSB on 25
October 2002.

3.  The applicant provided an email from USAEREC dated 6 December 2002
indicating the NCOER for the period ending March 2001 had been received.
(His NCOER for the period ending March 2002 could not have been processed
until his NCOER for the period ending March 2001 was received and
processed.)

4.  The applicant provided a DA Form 638 dated 12 March 2001 that showed he
was recommended for award of the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM); however,
award of the MSM was disapproved and he was awarded the ARCOM for service
for the period 1 December 1998 to 15 March 2001.

5. The applicant's application for retirement is not available.  Orders
reassigning him to the transition center for the purpose of retirement were
dated 7 August 2002.
6.  The applicant was released from active duty on 30 June 2003 and placed
on the retired list on 1 July 2003 in the rank and grade of SFC, E-7.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) states,
in pertinent part, a Standby Advisory Board (STAB) may be approved upon
determining that a material error existed in a Soldier's Official Military
Personnel File (OMPF) when the file was reviewed by a promotion board.  An
error is considered material when there is a reasonable chance that had the
error not existed the soldier may have been selected.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 states reconsideration normally will be
granted when one or more of several listed conditions existed on the
Soldier's OMPF at the time it was reviewed by a promotion selection board.
One of the listed conditions was the absence of an award of an MSM or
higher.  Another listed condition was the absence of an annual or change-of-
rater NCOER that was received at USAEREC early enough for processing and
filing before the convening date of the promotion selection board.  75 days
is allowed for processing after the through date of the report or the date
the PSB completes Part I, Section I, for late reports.  Absence of an award
for achievement or meritorious service lower than an MSM does not
constitute material error and will not be a reason for reconsideration.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 states, in pertinent part, to be eligible for
promotion consideration Soldiers must not be ineligible to reenlist due to
retirement.

10.  Army Regulation 623-205 (Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reporting
System) states, in pertinent part, commanders at all levels will ensure
reports are carefully prepared and submitted in sufficient time to reach
USAEREC not later than 60 days after the ending month of the report for
Active Army Soldiers.

11.  Military Personnel Message Number 01-026, dated 25 October 2000,
announced the zones of consideration for promotion to MSG.  In pertinent
part, it stated OMPF update material must have been forwarded to USAEREC in
accordance with the governing regulation and received at USAEREC not later
than 19 January 2001.

12.  The 2001 MSG promotion selection board convened on 30 January 2001;
the 2002 board convened on 5 February 2002; and the 2003 board convened on
4 February 2003.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Absence of an award for achievement or meritorious service lower than
     an MSM does not constitute material error and will not be a reason for
reconsideration.  Therefore, the applicant's missing ARCOM is not a reason
for reconsideration.

2.  The 2001 MSG promotion selection board convened on 30 January 2001.
The message announcing the zones of consideration stated, in part, that
OMPF update material must have been received at USAEREC not later than 19
January 2001.

3.  The applicant's NCOER for the period ending November 2000 was signed by
the rating officials on 17 January 2001.  Army Regulation 623-205 requires
commanders to ensure NCOERs for Active Army Soldiers reach USAEREC not
later than 60 days after the ending month of the report.  The applicant's
commanders therefore had until the end of January 2001 to forward this
NCOER to USAEREC.  Since his command was not required to forward the NCOER
to USAEREC by 19 January 2001, the fact this NCOER was not reviewed by the
board is not a reason for reconsideration.

4.  The 2002 MSG promotion selection board convened on 5 February 2002.
The applicant's NCOER for the period ending March 2001 was not even signed
by his rating officials until 12 November 2002.  Army Regulation 600-8-19
states reconsideration normally will be granted when an annual or change-of-
rater NCOER was received at USAEREC early enough for processing and filing
before the convening date of the promotion selection board.  This NCOER
obviously could not have been received at USAREREC in time for review by
the 2002 MSG promotion selection board.  However, the applicant should not
be penalized for the negligence of his rating officials.

5.  It would be equitable to show the applicant's NCOER for the period
ending March 2001 was signed by him, the rating officials, and the PSB on
12 November 2001 and that it was received and processed by USAEREC in time
to have been considered by the 2002 MSG promotion selection board.  His
records should then be sent to a STAB for promotion reconsideration to MSG
under the 2002 criteria.

6.  The applicant's NCOER for the period ending March 2002 could not have
been considered by the 2002 promotion board that convened on 5 February
2002.

7.  The 2003 MSG promotion selection board convened on 4 February 2003.
However, the applicant's retirement had been approved sometime prior to
      7 August 2002.  He therefore did not meet the eligibility criteria
for consideration by the 2003 MSG promotion selection board.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

__mdm___  __lcb___  __cd____  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board
recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual
concerned be corrected by:

     a.  amending his NCOER for the period December 2000 through March 2001
to show it was signed by him, his rating officials, and the PSB on 12
November 2001 and that it was received and processed by USAEREC in time to
have been considered by the 2002 MSG promotion selection board; and

     b.  making his records available to the next scheduled STAB for
promotion consideration to MSG under the 2002 criteria.

2.  If he is not selected for promotion, he be notified accordingly.

3.  If he is selected for promotion, he may apply to the Board for further
relief.

4.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
granting him a STAB under the 2001 and 2003 MSG promotion selection board
criteria.




                                  __Mark D. Manning_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050000378                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051004                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schneider                           |
|ISSUES         1.       |131.11                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]