RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  17 July 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060017371 


	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.  


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Ms. Wanda L. Waller

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. John Slone

Chairperson

Mr. David Haasenritter

Member

Ms. LaVerne Douglas

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, that her date of rank (DOR) and promotion effective date to sergeant first class be adjusted to 1 October 2005 instead of 
21 August 2006.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that her DOR and effective date are incorrect on the published promotion orders, dated 22 August 2006.  She points out that she made the promotion selection list on the 2005 Sergeant First Class Board.  She contends that according to the Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri she was fully qualified and that an “administrative human error” was made while entering the data to publish the promotion orders.  

3.  The applicant provides copies of emails; documentation from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command database; an Enlisted Record Brief; a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 20 October 2006; a DA Form 4187-1-R (Personnel Action Form Addendum), dated 24 October 2006; a chronological sequences of events; documentation pertaining to her Military Occupational Specialty (MOS)/Medical Retention Board (MMRB); and promotion orders, dated 
22 August 2006.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 14 June 1996 in pay grade E-5 for a period of 6 years.  She was promoted to E-6 effective 
1 January 1997.  The applicant was apparently on active duty when she reenlisted in the USAR on 20 March 2002 for a period of 6 years.  She was ordered to active duty in an Active Guard Reserve (AGR) status effective date 
20 March 2002 for a period of 6 years.

2.  The applicant was selected for promotion to sergeant first class by the 2005 AGR Board that convened on 7 June 2005.

3.  Apparently, the applicant was issued a permanent profile on 6 December 2004 and referred to an MMRB.

4.  On 31 January 2006, the applicant appeared before a MMRB.  The board recommended that the applicant be placed on probation for six months to allow her to go to a medical facility for reevaluation to ensure that she could wear headgear and a gas mask in the event of deployment.  On 3 March 2006, the findings and recommendations of the MMRB were approved.


5.  U.S. Army Human Resources Command Orders B-08-606162, dated 
22 August 2006, show the applicant was promoted to sergeant first class with a DOR of 21 August 2006.

6.  The applicant provided an email, dated 27 November 2006, from the Acting Sergeant Major, U.S. Army Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri.  It states, in pertinent part, that “Her [the applicant] permanent profile dated 6 December 2004, referring her to a MEB/PEB [Medical Evaluation Board/Physical Evaluation Board] placed her in a non-promotable status since she at that time became ineligible for reenlistment until found fit for duty by a MEB/PEB” and “As of this date, there is no indication that a MEB/PEB has rendered a fit for duty determination.”

7.  In support of her claim, the applicant provided documentation from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command database which shows she was selected by the 2005 AGR Sergeant First Class Board and that she was duty position qualified.

8.  In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Acting Sergeant Major, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri.  The opinion states that the applicant’s current DOR and effective date of promotion (21 August 2006) was the earliest possible date she could have been promoted based on the regulatory guidance in effect at the time of her promotion.  The applicant was in a non-promotable status due to referral to a MEB when she was originally eligible.  The consolidation of the enlisted promotion regulations (Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Regular Army), Army Regulation 140-158 (U.S. Army Reserve), and National Guard Regulation 
600-200 (Army National Guard), effective 21 August 2006, changed the policy to allow for the promotion of Soldiers undergoing medical evaluation.  The applicant was promoted effective the date the enlisted regulations were consolidated 
(21 August 2006).

9.  A copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for comment and possible rebuttal.  On 14 June 2007, she responded.  In summary, she stated that she trusts her peers, senior officers, supervisors, and unit personnel office in managing her records.  She indicated that she also trusts her unit retention sergeant major with their expertise in guiding her career, enhancing her knowledge, and broadening the opportunities of advancement.  She also described her dedicated selfless service.   

10.  Army Regulation 140-158 (Enlisted Personnel Classification, Promotion, and Reduction) in effect at the time stated, in pertinent part, that a Soldier would not be promoted if they were ineligible for immediate reenlistment or extension in the USAR per Army Regulation 140-111.  

11.  Table 2-1 (Basic reenlistment eligibility criteria) of Army Regulation 140-111 (U.S. Army Reserve Reenlistment Program) states, in pertinent part, that a Soldier is disqualified for reenlistment without a waiver if they do not meet the retention medical fitness standards in Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3. 

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) was consolidated on 21 August 2006 with the Reserve Component enlisted promotion regulations and applies to enlisted members of the Active Army, the Army National Guard/Army National Guard of the United States, and the USAR.  The regulation states, in pertinent part, that Soldiers who are pending referral to a MOS/medical retention board or referral to a MEB or PEB will not be denied promotion (if already promotable) on the basis of medical disqualification if they are otherwise qualified for promotion.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contentions were noted.  However, evidence of record shows the applicant was in a non-promotable status due to referral to a MMRB in December 2004 in accordance with the regulation in effect at the time.  At that time, she became ineligible for reenlistment until found fit for duty by a MEB/PEB. According to the email provided by the applicant, there was no indication that a MEB/PEB had rendered a fit for duty determination as of 27 November 2006.  

2.  On 21 August 2006, however, the Active Army and Reserve Component enlisted promotion regulations were consolidated and the policy was changed to allow for the promotion of Soldiers undergoing medical evaluation.  However, there is no evidence in the regulation to indicate the policy was retroactive.  The earliest DOR the applicant could be given was 21 August 2006, the date the enlisted regulations were consolidated.

3.  Based on the foregoing, the applicant’s DOR of 21 August 2006 and her effective date of 21 August 2006 are correct.  As there is no evidence to show the applicant was treated any differently from other Soldiers in her circumstances, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s requests.






BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

JS_____  __DH____  __LD____  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.



__John Slone__________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060017371
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
20070717
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
112.0200
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.