RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	    


	BOARD DATE:	  19 September 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070006821 


	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. Michael L. Engle

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. James E. Vick

Chairperson

Mr. Ronald D. Gant

Member

Mr. Rowland C. Heflin

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 correction of her military records to show that she was promoted to staff sergeant, pay grade E6.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she submitted her staff sergeant promotion packet in May and June 2006.   She continually inquired about her promotion status.  In August 2006, she was offered an assignment to an Army Guard/Reserve (AGR) position, which she accepted.   She first learned in October 2006, that she had been placed on the Permanent Promotion Recommended List (PPRL) in July 2006, but no orders were ever published.  

3.  The applicant provides copies of her assignment orders, PPRL, PPRL Policy Memorandum, and electronic communications between herself and the G1, United States Army Reserve Medical Command.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  At the time of the applicant’s request, she was on active duty as a sergeant, pay grade E5, AGR.  She was assigned for duty at Fort Eustis, Virginia. 

2.  Orders 04-061-00017, Headquarters, 99th Regional Readiness Command, dated 1 March 2004, assigned the applicant, effective 10 February 2004, to the 2290th United States Army Hospital, Washington, DC.  This was a Troop Program Unit (TPU) assignment.

3.  On 20 November 2005, the applicant submitted an electronic application for AGR duty.

4.  On 12 May 2006, the 2290th United States Army Hospital Enlisted Promotion Board convened to review records for promotion to sergeant/staff sergeant.  This board considered and subsequently selected the applicant for promotion to staff sergeant.  

5.  The Junior Enlisted Promotion List, Army Reserve Medical Command, as of 15 July 2006, shows the applicant was selected for promotion to staff sergeant in military occupational specialty 42L (Administrative sergeant), with a date of rank and effective date of 15 June 2006.  

6.  Records show that on 11 August 2006, the applicant was cleared by the security office for assignment into the AGR Program.


7.  Orders R-08-685644, United States Army Human Resources Command, 
1 Reserve Way, St. Louis, Missouri, dated 15 August 2006, ordered the applicant, effective 11 September 2006, to active duty in AGR status as a sergeant, pay grade E5, to the 302nd Transportation Corps Company, Fort Eustis, Virginia, for a period of 3 years.

8.  On 24 April 2007, in an electronic communication, the administrator for Junior/Senior Enlisted Promotions, 8th Medical Command, stated that it was not the applicant’s fault for not being promoted.

9.  On 27 April 2007, in an electronic communication, the G1, Army Reserve Medical Command, stated that the applicant had been added to the PPRL in July 2006 based on her board recommendation in May 2006.  Her effective date was 15 June 2006.  Promotion policy required publication of orders immediately upon receipt of the PPRL unless the recommended Soldier was flagged.  Orders were not published.  An inquiry provided the response that the applicant had been flagged, but there is no record of there ever being a flag. Subsequently, the applicant was offered an AGR position in the rank of sergeant, pay grade E5.

10.  In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Acting Sergeant Major, United States Army Resources Command, 1 Reserve Way, St. Louis, Missouri.  The advisory opinion provided that that the applicant had been recommended for promotion to staff sergeant by the 2290th United States Army Hospital in May 2006, while still in a TPU status.  However, the applicant did not realize her promotion by the time she voluntarily entered into the AGR Program.  The opinion further provided that regulatory guidance required removal of the applicant’s name from the promotion recommended list when reassigned from a TPU status.  Therefore, the applicant was no longer on that particular recommended list and could not be promoted.  

11.  On 9 July 2007, the applicant provided a rebuttal statement to the advisory opinion.  She restated her position and requested to be promoted. 

12.  Army Regulation 140-158 (Enlisted Personnel Classification, Promotion, and Reduction) provides, in pertinent part, that reassignment to AGR status does not preclude promotion to staff sergeant while still assigned to the TPU. 





DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence clearly and convincingly shows that the applicant was properly recommended for promotion to staff sergeant and that she was integrated onto her unit’s promotion list, with an effective date of 15 June 2006.

2.  There is no substantiating evidence showing that the applicant was flagged or otherwise ineligible for promotion during the period from 12 May to 15 August 2006. Therefore, she should have been promoted effective 15 Jun 2006.   

3.  The evidence shows that the applicant accepted an AGR assignment, as a sergeant, pay grade E5, and was placed on orders dated 15 August 2006.  By this time, she should have already been promoted to staff sergeant.  Her reassignment was effective 11 September 2006.

4.  Promotion to staff sergeant, pay grade E6, with an effective date and date of rank 15 June 2006, could invalidate her current AGR status as a sergeant, pay grade E5.  Therefore, the applicant should be provided a determination, in writing, by the appropriate office, informing her as to how this promotion will affect her current AGR status.    

5.  In view of the above, the applicant’s request should be granted. 

BOARD VOTE:

__RCH___  __JEV___  __RDG_  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION










BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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

a.   showing that she was provided an opportunity to accept or decline promotion to staff sergeant, pay grade E6, with a date of rank and effective date of 15 June 2006, based on its affect to her AGR status; 

b.  showing, if she so elected, that she was promoted to staff sergeant, pay grade E6, with a date of rank and effective date of 15 June 2006;

c.  showing, if so promoted, that she was granted all rights and privileges accorded with such promotion; and

d.  showing that she understood and agreed to any and all personnel management decisions resulting from her promotion to staff sergeant.







_         James E. Vick________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070006821
SUFFIX

RECON
 
DATE BOARDED
 20070919
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
  . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
131
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.