Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070002040
Original file (20070002040.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied


RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  29 November 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070002040 


	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

Mr. Rial D. Coleman

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. John T. Meixell

Chairperson

Ms. Jeanette R. McCants

Member

Mr. Scott W. Faught

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 his records be placed before an enlisted standby advisory promotion board (STAB) for promotion consideration to the rank and pay grade of master sergeant/E-8.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that although he was eligible for consideration by the 2006 Master Sergeant Promotion Board, he was not considered.  The applicant further states that he was not given promotion consideration by the 2006 Master Sergeant Promotion Board because that board erroneously believed he had not attended and completed the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course (ANCOC).

3.  The applicant adds that the records that went before the 2006 Master Sergeant Promotion Board was incomplete and that, in essence, he should be given consideration by a standby advisory promotion board.  The applicant concludes, if selected, he requests his date of rank to be adjusted to reflect selection by the 2006 Master Sergeant Promotion Board.

4.  The applicant provides a one page self-authored memorandum, two electronic mail (email) messages, and two DA Forms 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) as documentary evidence in support of this application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Records show the applicant is an Active Guard Reserve sergeant first class who has been on active duty since August 2000 and is currently assigned to 1st Information Operations Command (Land).  His date of rank to sergeant first class is 1 September 2002.

2.  The applicant provides an email addressed to him from a representative of U.S. Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, dated 22 December 2005.
The purpose of the email was to inform the applicant that he was eligible for consideration by the 2006 Master Sergeant Promotion Board.  U.S. Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri, memorandum, dated 15 November 2005, Subject: Consideration for 2006 AGR Master Sergeant Board was attached to the email.  The memorandum is addressed to each Soldier in and above the zone of consideration and, in effect, announces that the board will convene on 7 February 2006, the zones of consideration, education prerequisites, and other administrative requirements for consideration by the Promotion Board.


3.  The applicant provides an email addressed to him from a representative of U.S. Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, dated 10 February 2006.
The purpose of the email was to inform the applicant that their database indicated he did not meet the military education requirement of completing the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course prior to being considered for promotion to the next higher grade.  The email informed the applicant how to take corrective action in the event he had actually completed the course, was currently attending the course, desired to schedule a course date, or desired to decline attendance of the course.  Finally, the applicant was instructed to reply to this request for information no later than 1 March 2006.

4.  The applicant's record contains a DA Form 1059, dated 27 June 2003, which indicates completion of the first phase of the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course on 27 June 2003.

5.  The applicant's record contains a DA Form 1059, dated 24 October 2003, which indicates completion of the second phase of the Advanced
Noncommissioned Officer Course.

6.  An advisory opinion was obtained from the Acting Sergeant Major of the Enlisted Promotions Branch, Reserve Components, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), St. Louis, Missouri, dated 28 February 2007.  This opinion states that the applicant had been considered but non-selected for promotion by the 2005, 2006, and 2007 United States Army Reserve/Active Guard Reserve Master Sergeant Promotion Boards.  Since graduation from the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course is a prerequisite for consideration by the Master Sergeant board, the applicant's completion of the course was verified by their office for all three stated promotion boards.  The advisor opined that the applicant's request for an Enlisted Standby Advisory Board is without merit.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), prescribes the enlisted promotions and reductions function of the military personnel system. It provides principles of support, standards of service, policies, tasks, rules, and steps governing all work required in the field to support promotions and reductions.  It states, in pertinent part, Standby Advisory Boards are convened to consider records of those Soldiers not reviewed by a regular board or whose records were not properly constituted, due to a material error, when reviewed by the regular board.  Material error is considered one sufficient enough to cause the nonselection of a Soldier for promotion.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that his records should be placed before an enlisted STAB for promotion consideration to the rank and pay grade of master sergeant/E-8 was carefully considered and found to be without merit.

2.  The applicant's request was based solely upon his contention that he was not given promotion consideration by the 2006 Master Sergeant Promotion Board because that board erroneously believed he had not completed the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course.

3.  As stated in the advisory opinion from U.S. Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri, the applicant's board files contained documentary evidence of completion of the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course and were considered by three consecutive Master Sergeant Promotion Boards, all of which resulted in his nonselection for promotion.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board must presume regularity in the promotion board proceedings and in the applicant's discharge process.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant did not submit any evidence that would satisfy this requirement.  Therefore, he is not entitled to promotion to Master Sergeant.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__JTM__  __JRM___  __SWF__  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 T. Meixell____
          CHAIRPERSON


INDEX

CASE ID
AR
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
YYYYMMDD
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012030

    Original file (20110012030.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Requests received after 24 September 2010 will be processed in the order received but may not appear before the board; (8) paragraph 9b states, "In order to guarantee processing prior to board, all mandatory or optional NCOER's must be received, error free, in the Evaluation Reports Branch, HRC, not later than by close of business on 1 October 2010"; e. an undated ATRRS Request for Cancellation/Substitution Form showing his 1SG Course was cancelled because of his flag; f. an email from the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004384

    Original file (20110004384.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests reconsideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) decision denying him a Standby Advisory Board (STAB) for promotion consideration to master sergeant (MSG)/pay grade E-8 based on material error. The applicant states he contacted his rating chain concerning the Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER) with a Thru date of 30 July 2009. A DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 7 January 2010, Subject: Request STAB Reconsideration,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016275

    Original file (20080016275.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record shows that the applicant was promoted to SSG on 1 September 2002. He was accordingly scheduled to attend BNCOC; however, due to his surgery, he requested a deferment in July 2003 of his August 2003 BNCOC class. However, he provided no evidence to show he informed anyone between November 2003 and August 2004 (when he deployed) that he was medically cleared to attend BNCOC.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013263

    Original file (20100013263.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record shows the governing Army regulation provides that 75 days are allowed for processing annual NCOERs after the Thru date. The evidence of record shows the applicant was due a mandatory annual report with a Thru date of 30 July 2009. The evidence of record shows that an NCOER received after the specified cut-off date that does not get posted to the board file will not be a basis for STAB consideration.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012395

    Original file (20060012395.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant essentially states that her Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER) with an ending period of May 2003 was not submitted until after the 2003 and 2004 Sergeant Major/Command Sergeant Major Promotion Boards, and therefore requests that she be reconsidered for promotion by these boards. It concluded by essentially stating that since the 2003 and 2004 Promotion Selection Boards convened on 6 October 2003 and 19 October 2004, respectively, and the NCOER in question was...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070000855C071029

    Original file (20070000855C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that after returning from BNCOC she was told she would have to wait until the following year for the IRR/IMA promotion board and that she would not have to compete on the active duty side at all. In these messages, she is communicating with both active duty and USAR promotion officials trying to determine how and when she would be considered for promotion. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was not eligible for consideration for promotion to SFC until she...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007135

    Original file (20060007135.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the e-mail correspondence the applicant informed HRC St. Louis that his NCOER was sent to the promotion board on 13 February 2006 and the NCOER was sent to the records custodian for inclusion in his official military personnel file (OMPF) in the beginning of February. On 14 February 2006, the assistant promotion board recorder responded to the applicant. The HRC stated that the applicantÂ’s request for a STAB was denied because his NCOER was received after the convening date of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004495

    Original file (20120004495 .txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He failed to request the waiver; however, in an effort to assist him, USARC initiated the required paperwork for the applicant, resulting in approval of both waivers in June 2011. c. Regulatory provisions allow Soldiers to request promotion consideration by a STAB if their records were not considered by a regular board, or if their record contained a material error when reviewed by a regular board. Records show the applicant met the WLC requirement prior to the convening of the February...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015921

    Original file (20110015921.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2008 | 20080008580

    Original file (20080008580.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's military personnel records show he enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 16 June 1980 and his date of birth (DOB) is recorded as 18 June 1948. However, the message that announced that board specifically stated that the eligibility criteria for appointment as TPU CSM included, if the Soldier was a MSG with a PEBD of 1 March 1972 and later (the applicant's PEBD was 16 June 1974) and with a date of rank of 6 June 2001 and earlier (the applicant's date of rank was 16 March...