RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 17 May 2007
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060016091
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. Gerard W. Schwartz
Acting Director
Mr. Michael L. Engle
Analyst
The following members, a quorum, were present:
Mr. Eric N. Andersen
Chairperson
Mr. Antonio Uribe
Member
Mr. Rodney E. Barber
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 reconsideration of his earlier request to be authorized a Standby Advisory Board (STAB) for consideration for promotion to master sergeant, pay grade E8.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that a copy of the investigation was not provided to the Board for review because he could not obtain a copy. He also says that the investigating officer could not substantiate any findings and was told not to divulge any information to anyone. He contends that the only way to find out the truth would be to interview the investigating officer. The applicant argues that his performance evaluations were nearly perfect. He further states that 19 Soldiers who were selected for promotion to master sergeant had been supervised by the applicant. He asks, "what is the explanation for non-selection"?
3. The applicant provides copies of correspondence with his Senator (Tab A); Enlisted Record Brief (Tab B); Trainee Abuse Reports (Tab C); Letters of Support (Tab D); Recommendation for Award (Tab E); Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER)(Tab F); Contact Roster (Tab G); Suspension Letter (Tab H); Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (FLAG)(Tab I); Original Application for Correction of Military Records and Supporting documents (Tab J); and the Army Board for Correction of Military Records Results and Summary (Tab K).
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20050005982, on 19 January 2006.
2. The applicant provided a Trainee Abuse Report (Tab C) detailing reports of incidents of abuse by the applicant and five other Soldiers. The applicant's case was closed as an unsubstantiated allegation.
3. The applicant has provided 9 letters of support (Tab D) that address the applicant's high quality of service as a Soldier. They also provide third party information indicating that there were individuals with influence who had made concerted efforts to insure the applicant would not be selected for promotion.
4. The applicant provides a copy of his NCOER for the 7 month period from April to October 2003 (Tab F). This report rates the applicant as excellent in the areas of competence and physical fitness and military bearing. It rates him as being successful in the areas of leadership, training, responsibility and accountability. His rater considered him among the best. His senior rater did not meet the minimum qualifications to render him a rating.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The evidence provided by the applicant shows that he was under investigation for trainee abuse, but that the charges were not substantiated.
2. However, the applicant has not provided any convincing evidence showing that his non-selection for promotion was a result of improper influence or collusion. The applicant's argument that since his subordinates were selected for promotion he also should have been selected for promotion is not specious.
3. In view of the above the applicant's request should not be granted.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__ENA__ __AUJ___ __REB __ 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20050005982, dated 19 January 2006.
__ Eric N. Anderson_______
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
CASE ID
AR20060016091
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED
20070517
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
. . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.
131.0000
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005982C070206
The applicant states, through counsel, that he was suspended from drill sergeant duties pending investigation of allegations of trainee abuse and a suspension of favorable personnel actions (flag) was imposed on him. TRADOC Regulation 350-6, paragraph 2-5, states that commanders are responsible for reporting trainee abuse allegations as defined in these guidelines unless the commander can quickly determine the allegation is not credible. The promotion board members would have seen...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03094977C070212
In a 23 December 1997 memorandum to the Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center, an Army captain, a legal assistance attorney at Fort Bragg, stated that after a careful review of the applicant's NCOER, the QMP appeal packet, and the investigatory letter drafted by the applicant's brigade commander, that it was clear that the NCOER was unjustly tainted by the unproven accusation of the applicant's accuser, and was not based on the applicant's performance during the period. The ESRB...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088488C070403
The applicant appealed the QMP action, and submitted the same packet he now provides to this Board in support of this appeal. If, for whatever reasons, the relief does not occur on the date the NCO is removed from his or her duty position or responsibilities, the suspended period of time between the removal and the relief will be nonrated time included in the period of the relief report. The evidence of record confirms that on 2 October 1996, subsequent to the completion of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008106
In support of his request, the applicant provides: * a copy of the contested report * a memorandum of support from his rater during the time period of the contested report * two DA Forms 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) * eight NCOER's ranging from 1 January 2001 through 21 November 2008 * a series of tabs which include professional milestones, worldwide service, awards and decorations, and comments from the troops * a copy of his Enlisted Record Brief COUNSEL'S REQUEST,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010178
The applicant requests his records be corrected by: a. removal of a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR); b. lifting of a "permanent" flag (DD Form 268 Report to Suspend Favorable personnel Actions); c. reinstatement of his Bronze Star Medal and Special Forces Tab; and d. an NCOER (Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report) be rendered that reflects his "true accomplishments." The AR 15-6 investigating officer recommended disciplinary action be taken against the Team Leader,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711784
The applicant submitted an appeal of the bar to reenlistment with the support of his chain of command to the Department of the Army Standby Advisory Board at the Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (EREC). The DASEB denied his request. The applicant received a reprimand from his company commander and a letter of concern from his battalion commander and was counseled on several occasions by his commanders regarding his conduct in these matters.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000451C070206
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests the removal of a noncommissioned officer evaluation report (NCOER) covering the period from January 2002 through August 2002, from her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). While the third party statements are complimentary of the applicant’s performance, none of those statements serve to substantiate the applicant’s allegation that her battalion commander, who was not in her rating chain, exerted undue...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004104433C070208
On 11 April 2001, the applicant was given a change of rater NCOER for the period May 2000 through November 2000 for performance of duty as the Noncommissioned Officer in Charge of the Medical Equipment Repair Section of the Medical Maintenance Branch, Medical Department Activity (MEDDAC), West Point, New York. The applicant submitted an application to the Board on 18 April 2003 requesting removal of the NCOER for the period June 2000 through November 2000 from his OMPF. The applicant's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018360
A review of the applicant's OMPF shows the change-of-rater report covering the period 1 June 2007 to 18 January 2008 is the report of record. A review of the company and battalion commander's records failed to reveal any derogatory information such as a reprimand in their OMPF's related to the contested NCOER. It is also noted that both the commander's inquiry and the Army Regulation 15-6 investigation concluded that the applicant was not properly counseled and mentored by his rating chain...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086015C070212
The applicant requests that her noncommissioned officer evaluation report (NCOER) for the period May 1991 through September 1991 be removed from her records, that she receive the promotions that were denied her due to the unjust rating, and, in effect, that she be granted a 30-year retirement. The Board has considered the applicant's further requests that she receive the promotions that were denied her due to the unjust rating, and, in effect, that she be granted a 30-year retirement. The...