Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012952
Original file (20080012952.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  16 October 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080012952 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration of the Board's denial of his request to be reconsidered for promotion to master sergeant (MSG) by a Stand-By Advisory Board (STAB) based on the Enlisted Special Review Board (ESRB) amendment of a Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER).

2.  The applicant states that he has submitted documentation in which he points out his areas of concern.

3.  The applicant provides an NCOER for the period covering June 2003 to December 2003; an excerpt from DA Pam 600-25; and a memorandum from the Human Resources Command (HRC) dated 23 October 2007.

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 AR20070005858 on 11 December 2007.

2.  The NCOER provided by the applicant has already been considered by the Board and is not, therefore, new evidence.

3.  However, the excerpt from DA Pam 600-25 which states that, for the applicant’s military occupational specialty (MOS) special assignments as operations sergeant at the MSG level are available, is new evidence as is the memorandum from the HRC which states that “A variety of challenging and demanding assignments in both the operating and generating forces in the current grade with exceptional performance was viewed as strengthening a Soldier’s file.”  These new documents require the Board to reconsider the applicant’s request.

4.  In the Board’s first consideration of the applicant’s request, it was noted that, for the amended NCOER, the applicant received "Success" evaluations from his rater in all areas covered in Part IV (Values/NCO Responsibilities).  His rater placed him in block 2 "Fully Capable" of Part Va. (Rater-Overall Potential).  In Part Vc (Senior Rater. Overall Performance) the senior rater placed him in block 2 (Successful) and in Part Vd (Senior Rater-Overall Potential) the senior rater placed him in block 2 (Superior).   

5.  In the Board’s first consideration it was also noted that on 9 April 2007, the President, Special Review Boards, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, notified the applicant that the ESRB had adjudicated his appeal on the contested NCOER for the period June 2003 through December 2003, and granted partial approval.  This official stated the SRDC would correct Part IIIa of the contested report to show his Principal Duty Title as "Patient Administration NCO" and Part IIIe by adding "Operations NCO" to his appointed duties.  This official further stated that promotion reconsideration was not warranted based on these changes.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant believes that the correction of the mistake in the entries of his duty titles in one NCOER would result in a STAB selecting him for promotion.

2.  The Board denied the applicant’s request because there was no evidence or indication that the correction of the applicant’s duty titles would result in his selection for promotion.  This conclusion was based on the comment made by the President, Special Review Boards, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, when the ESRB amended the applicant’s NCOER.

3.  The excerpt from DA Pam 600-25 which states that, for the applicant’s military occupational specialty (MOS) special assignments as operations sergeant at the MSG level are available, does not alter the conclusions reached by this Board in its first consideration of this case.  This excerpt merely states that operations assignments are available to MSGs in the applicant’s MOS.

4.  However, careful consideration is given to the memorandum from the HRC which states that “A variety of challenging and demanding assignments in both the operating and generating forces in the current grade with exceptional performance was viewed as strengthening a Soldier’s file.”  In this regard, only one NCOER was amended in the applicant’s military records.  Therefore, the error did not alter the applicant’s records by failing to show a variety of assignments, which means several assignments.  Also, while the applicant’s amended NCOER shows the applicant performing well, it does not show exceptional performance.

5.  In summary, the amendment of one NCOER to show proper duty titles in a report that does not indicate exceptional performance is not significant enough to believe that the applicant would have been selected for promotion by a STAB.

6.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__X_____  ___X____  ___X___  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 AR20070005858 dated 11 December 2007.




      _______ _X   _______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080012952





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080012952



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050008250C070206

    Original file (20050008250C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, promotion to master sergeant/E-8 (MSG/E-8) and all back pay due as a result; and removal of a Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER) from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). This promotion official indicates the policy in effect at the time of the Calendar Year (CY) 2003 MSG/E-8 promotion selection board, as articulated in paragraph 4d of the promotion board announcement message, stipulated that Soldiers in the rank of SFC/E-7 were...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070012829

    Original file (20070012829.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect, that had it not been for the derogatory Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER) in his record for the September 2003 through May 2004, he would have been promoted to MSG/E-8 by the FY05 Promotion Selection Board. c. DA Form 2166-8 (NCO Evaluation Report ), for the period September 2003 through May 2004. d. Memorandum, dated 27 September 2004, U.S. Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (USAEREC), Indianapolis, Indiana, rejecting the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050011565C070206

    Original file (20050011565C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In all of these reports, he received “Among the Best” evaluations from his raters in Part Va. (Rater. In Part IVb-f of the contested report, the rater gave the applicant four “Success” ratings and one “Needs Improvement (Some)” rating. The senior rater also informed the ESRB that he counseled the applicant during the contested rating period, which is documented in a DA Form 4856, dated 25 April 02.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150013880

    Original file (20150013880.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel states: * the applicant has future potential in the Army and would continue to be an asset if allowed to continue in the service * the applicant disputes the underlying adverse actions that initiated or led to the QMP * the denial of continued service is based on two erroneous NCOERs (from 20080219-20090130) * the applicant received a company grade Article 15 which was directed to be filed in the restricted folder of his OMPF but the applicant has improved his performance since this...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006513

    Original file (20080006513.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Therefore, notwithstanding the ESRB determination that promotion reconsideration was not applicable, it is concluded that it would be appropriate and serve the interest of justice to grant an exception to policy that would allow the applicant’s record to be placed before a STAB, for promotion reconsideration to MSG using the criteria used by all MSG promotion selection boards that considered the applicant for promotion while the invalid NCOER was on file in his OMPF. If the STAB selects the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012935

    Original file (20140012935.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019262

    Original file (20130019262.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests a Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER) for the period 1 March 2009 through 28 February 2010 (hereafter referred to as the contested NCOER) be removed from his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR). Additionally, the contested NCOER shows in: * Part Ii (Rated Months) 12 * Part Ij (Non-Rated Codes) "I,S" * Part IIIf (Counseling Dates) initial "20090630" and later "20090928" and "20091203" * Part Ve (Senior Rater Bullet Comments) "Soldier refused to...

  • 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 | CY2015 | 20150010509

    Original file (20150010509.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was honorably released from active service on 28 October 2008. This will ensure that the rating chain and the rated NCO are informed of the completed report and may allow for a possible request for a Commander’s Inquiry or appeal if desired. There is insufficient evidence that shows the contested report contains any administrative or substantive deficiencies or inaccuracies or that it was not prepared in compliance with applicable regulations and policies, other than that portion the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002988

    Original file (20120002988.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests: a. removal of the relief-for-cause DA Form 2166-8 (Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Evaluation Report (NCOER)) covering the rating period 1 March through 5 July 2009 (hereafter referred to as the contested NCOER) from his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) and b. promotion to sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 with a date of rank of October 2009. b. Paragraph 2-10 states the rated Soldier will participate in counseling and provide and discuss with the rating chain...