IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 15 July 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090021739
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 to be promoted to the rank/grade of master sergeant (MSG)/E-8.
2. The applicant states, in effect, he completed the advanced noncommissioned officer course (ANCOC) in "a highly satisfactory manner." He adds "Successful completion of this course meets the military education requirements for promotion to the grade of E-8."
3. The applicant provides a copy of his:
* Certificate of Retirement, dated 5 September 2002
* DA Form 2166-6 (Enlisted Evaluation Report) for the period 8110 through 8210
* DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) for completion of ANCOC, dated 29 July 1989
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted,
has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicant is a retired Reserve Component (RC) Soldier, having served in the Army National Guard (ARNG) and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) for more than 27 years from January 1961 to 30 June 1992. He was subsequently discharged from the California ARNG (CAARNG) and he was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Retired).
3. The record shows the applicant was promoted to sergeant first class (SFC/
E-7) on 15 June 1982. The record does not show he was ever selected for or promoted to the rank of MSG.
4. Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) prescribes the enlisted promotions and reductions function of the military personnel system. It is linked to the Army Regulation 600-8 series and 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 provides the objectives of the Army's Enlisted Promotions System, which include filling authorized enlisted spaces with the best qualified Soldiers. Further, this system provides for career progression and rank that are in line with potential and for recognition of the best qualified Soldier, which will attract and retain the highest caliber Soldier for a career in the Army. Additionally, the system precludes promoting the Soldier who is not productive or not the best qualified, thus providing an equitable system for all Soldiers. There are many rules regarding ARNG promotions:
* The State Adjutant General (AG) is the convening and promotion authority for all promotion boards to sergeant (SGT)/E-5 through sergeant major (SGM)/E-9
* Selection criteria include time-in-grade, time-in-service, high school diploma/equivalency, military occupational specialty (MOS) qualified, noncommissioned officer educational system (NCOES) qualified, etc.
* Ineligibility criteria include enlistment bars, physically unfit, unsatisfactory participation, transfer to the Inactive National Guard (ING), etc.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant, who was discharged from the CAARNG, placed in the Retired Reserve on 30 June 1992, and became eligible for retired pay on 5 September 2002, believes he should have been promoted to MSG because he completed ANCOC.
2. Possessing the appropriate NCOES level is but one component of the promotion system; there are many other criteria to consider in promoting an NCO to MSG. The promotion system is competitive and seeks to promote the best qualified Soldier.
3. The applicant's record has been reviewed and there are no promotion orders to MSG in his file. Likewise, there is no indication that he was ever denied promotion consideration based upon a stated ineligibility criterion. Absent evidence to the contrary, regularity is presumed in the applicant's case and that he was never promoted beyond SFC for valid reasons.
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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
__________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) AR20090021739
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090021739
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140020266
The applicant requests reinstatement to the Enlisted Promotion System (EPS) Master Sergeant (MSG) Promotion List and promotion to MSG. The applicant states: * he was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Retired) from the Delaware Army National Guard (DEARNG) in 1995 with 21 years of service as a sergeant first class SFC/E-7 * he had been on the promotion list for the last 7 years * he was told that he did not have the required time remaining for promotion and that he needed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052654C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He states that he assumes that his records would also be presented to the STAB for consideration following the MSG board based on his back dated rank to SFC. The applicant indicates he has not.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005461
The applicant states there was a push to control failures of the Noncommissioned Officer Education System (NCOES) candidates by requiring Soldiers to pass the Army physical fitness test (APFT) at the unit. Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), in effect at the time, stated that effective 1 October 1993, the Army linked NCOES to promotion to SSG, SFC, master sergeant (MSG) and sergeant major (SGM). The applicant accepted the promotion with the condition and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100015331
CAARNG orders in the applicant's record in the interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System show he was transferred among CAARNG units several times after his release from active duty (REFRAD) on 15 March 2005. CAARNG Orders 144-1108, dated 14 May 2006, show the applicant was administratively reduced from SGT/E-5 to SPC/E-4 effective 4 April 2006 by authority of National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management), paragraph 11-58. The evidence of record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017580
The evidence of record confirms when he requested attendance at Phase II of ANCOC the applicant was erroneously informed he had met all the requirements for the ANCOC and as a result satisfied the NCOES requirement for promotion to MSG/E-8 by his command. In view of the facts of this case, as outlined in the USARC advisory opinion, it would be appropriate to correct the record to show the applicant was fully qualified for promotion to MSG/E-8 when he was selected in July 2001, and that he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040001256C070208
The applicant states that because of an "erroneously filed" document in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), he was denied promotion consideration to Sergeant First Class (SFC) by the CY 1999 and CY 2000 SFC Selection Boards. The applicant provides: a. The Army acted properly in granting the applicant standby advisory board promotion reconsideration, in promoting him to SFC with a 1999 promotion date, and in scheduling him to attend ANCOC.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018293
The applicant states he was reduced from E-7 back to E-6 for not completing the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course (ANCOC) Phase II in time even though he had physical problems. His effort to complete ANCOC is evident by the completion of ANCOC Phase I a second time, even after the reduction and suspension of his conditional promotion effective in January 2003. There is no evidence of record which indicates he completed ANCOC Phase II.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011163
These orders show the applicant's retired grade as SFC with a date of rank of 1 April 1995. Based on the evidence of record, the applicant was conditionally promoted to SFC/E-7 with the understanding that he was required to complete ANCOC to validate and maintain his promotion. __________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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071116C070402
This order also contained special instructions indicating that those members accepting a conditional promotion and who are subsequently denied enrollment, declared a no-show, become an academic failure or otherwise do not meet graduation requirements of the required Noncommissioned Education System (NCOES) course would be reduced to the grade and rank held prior to the conditional promotion. On 25 February 2002, the applicant’s battalion commander submitted a request to this Board, asking...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019517
The applicant states, in effect, that he was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 1 June 1998 and on 11 August 1998, his promotion was unjustly revoked. Notwithstanding the NGB advisory opinion, evidence shows that the applicant did not meet the NCOES requirement for promotion to SFC as an AGR Soldier at the time he entered the AGR Program or at any time thereafter. When he entered the AGR Program in 1985 he was required to have completed either AC-ANCOC or both the RC Advanced Course...