Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013330
Original file (20100013330.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	15 June 2010  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100013330 


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 his rank be corrected to staff sergeant/pay grade E-6.

2.  The applicant states this correction will allow him to enter Officer Candidate School (OCS) and continue his career as a military intelligence officer.  If he cannot enter OCS, his desire is to attain the rank of staff sergeant before his enlistment is over to allow him to be more marketable for employment.

3.  The applicant states he had attained the required points for promotion to staff sergeant during his first enlistment, but his command did not promote him when they realized he was not reenlisting.  He states he had to separate from the Army in order to attain his citizenship.  He was separated as a sergeant/pay grade E-5 and that 15 months after he was separated he reentered the Army in military occupational specialty (MOS) 35M (Human Intelligence Collector).  He states he was told he could not enlist as a sergeant because MOS 35M was saturated with sergeants, but he could enlist as a specialist four/pay grade E-4.  He states he has been on the automatic E-5 list in MOS 35M since 2007 and he has not been given the opportunity to appear before the promotion board.  He states at this point he is not allowed to appear before the E-5 board because of the policies of the battalion.  






4.  The applicant provides no additional evidence in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant served in the Regular Army from 19 February 2002 to 31 May 2006.  He was promoted to sergeant/pay grade E-5 effective 1 August 2005 in the MOS of 11B (Infantryman).  He was released from active duty in the rank of sergeant/pay grade E-5.  There is no evidence in his official military personnel file (OMPF) that shows he was on a promotion list for staff sergeant/pay grade E-6.  

2.  On 25 September 2007, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army in pay grade E-4 for 3 years.  He enlisted under the U.S. Army Training Enlistment Program to attend the course of instruction for MOS 35M.  An entry on page 4 of his DD Form 1966 (Record of Military Processing - Armed Forces of the United States) indicates a grade determination waiver was approved for pay grade E-4.

3.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) prescribes policies and procedures governing promotion and reduction of Army enlisted personnel:

	a.  Paragraph 3-17 (Department of the Army directed promotion list integration (sergeant)) states that on a monthly basis, all Soldiers in all MOSs who meet the following criteria will be integrated onto the SGT recommended list when:
* Soldier has attained 46 months time in service
* Soldier has attained 10 months time in grade
* otherwise not ineligible in accordance with this regulation
* not otherwise denied by the commander
	
	b.  This policy does not change the standards for promotion.  To ensure the chain-of-command remains an integral part of the process, commanders have the responsibility to remove a Soldier from the recommended list, thus blocking a potential promotion if it is determined the Soldier is not trained or otherwise qualified in accordance with the promotion standards outlined in this chapter.

	

	c.  Paragraph 3-37 (Rules for Processing Service Remaining Requirements) provides the service remaining requirement is 12 months for promotion to staff sergeant.

4.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) provides that applicants enlisting in pay grade E-5 and above must submit a formal request to the Commanding General, U.S. Army Recruiting Command (CG, USAREC) to determine assignment eligibility.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his rank should be corrected to show he is serving as a staff sergeant/pay grade E-6.  He contends he was on the promotion list for staff sergeant during his first enlistment but his command would not promote him when they realized he was not reenlisting.

2.  There is no evidence of the applicant having been on a staff sergeant promotion list during his first enlistment.  Had he been on a promotion list and did not have 12 months remaining in the service he would not have been promotion eligible and the command would not have promoted him.

3.  The applicant's promotion status in MOS 11B at the conclusion of his first enlistment has no bearing on his current pay grade.  At the time of his enlistment on 25 September 2007, his DD Form 1966 contains an entry that shows he was approved for a grade determination waiver for enlistment in pay grade E-4 in MOS 35M.  His enlistment shows he acknowledged and accepted the grade determination.  Therefore, he is now required to compete for promotion in his current MOS of 35M.

4.  The applicant contends he has been on the directed promotion list integration (sergeant) since 2007.  The reasons the applicant has not been promoted to sergeant/pay grade E-5 are not a matter of record.  

5.  The Board does not change military records solely to make an individual eligible for other programs or to enhance employment opportunities after discharge.


6.  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 has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

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)                                         AR20100013330



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100013330



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001348

    Original file (20080001348.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His commander initiated an informal investigation to determine if his reenlistment was fraudulent; c. the applicant did not deliberately conceal any disqualifying factor in his reenlistment. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The IO determined that the applicant's reenlistment was neither fraudulent nor defective; rather, an erroneous reenlistment.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009628

    Original file (20080009628.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. In the applicant and counsel’s request to grant the applicant pro rata of recoupment of any SRB already paid by installments based upon the percentage of service completed, counsel provides many in-depth trains of logic which address whether the applicant obtained his SRB through fraud, whether the applicant’s discharge from his erroneous reenlistment contract constituted...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028917

    Original file (20100028917.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The official stated, effective 1 April 2009, the PS enlistment bonus was no longer authorized for those who were not MOSQ at the time of enlistment. He stated the Soldier signed the enlistment bonus in good faith and had fulfilled all requirements in the contract to receive the bonus. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army and State Army National Guard records of the individual concerned be corrected to: * Show he enlisted for MOS 35M, qualified for a $15,000...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002798

    Original file (20140002798.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states his DD Form 1966 (Record of Military Processing - Armed Forces of the United States) shows his enlistment MOS as 35M and he is requesting it be corrected to show MOS 09S. The applicant provides Orders 1088002, dated 17 March 2011, issued by the Sacramento MEPS, wherein it amended Order 1088001, dated 17 March 2011, pertaining to initial active duty for training (IADT) to read MOS 09S vice MOS 35M. Although the specific reasons as to why his orders were changed and he...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012116

    Original file (20130012116.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The 88th RSC staff asked for a better copy, but the U.S. Army Reserve Military Intelligence Readiness Command (MIRC) did not respond. The applicant provides copies of: * 373d Military Intelligence Battalion memorandum for Commander, MIRC, dated 12 August 2011, listing the Soldiers considered for promotion * 373d Military Intelligence Battalion memorandum Commander, MIRC, dated 12 August 2011, listing the Soldiers recommended for promotion, including the applicant * MIRC Office of the IG...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011516

    Original file (20110011516.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states he served in MOS 35M while on active duty, but his DD Form 214 shows he served as an 88M. Orders 301-408, issued by the TXARNG, dated 27 October 2008, ordered the applicant to active duty in support of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) for a period not to exceed 400 days, effective 25 November 2008. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 1 year and 27 days of net active service this period.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080013285

    Original file (20080013285.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to his retired rank as that of captain (CPT) instead of sergeant first class (SFC). It also states, in pertinent part, that the DD Form 214 will be prepared for all personnel at the time of their retirement, discharge, or release from active duty. The evidence of records further shows that subsequent to his release from active duty as a CPT, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000436

    Original file (20130000436.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states: * he completed the Warrant Officer Basic Course (WOBC) on 5 November 2010 but his Federal recognition order shows an effective date of 23 January 2012 * he met the eligibility requirements for promotion to CW2 in the CAARNG upon completion of WOBC * National Guard Bureau (NGB) Policy Memorandum Number 07-026, dated 14 August 2007, subject: Policy to Appoint Sergeant First Class (SFC) to CW2, authorizes such promotion 3. He was promoted to SFC/E-7 on 30 May 2008. The...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002367

    Original file (20150002367.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides copies of his – * self-authored statement (summarized above) * Memorandum for Record (MFR), SLRP Waiver Due To critical skill MOS * transfer orders * MOS orders * DA Form 4836 (Oath of Extension or Reenlistment) * NGB Request for ETP SLRP * UTARNG Notice of Incentive Eligibility Termination * SLRP Payment History * NGB Form 600-7-5-R-E (Annex L – SLRP Addendum) * two requests for ETP * ARNG Selected Reserve Incentive Program (SRIP) Guidance for Fiscal Year (FY) 2007, 1...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003382

    Original file (20130003382.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    c. When Military Personnel (MILPER) Message Number 08-033, subject: (Updated) AAA-294 Enlisted Promotion Report – Automatic List Integration Section for Staff Sergeant) was issued on 1 February 2008, he was never informed of its provisions and he was not aware of any action by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) to put him on the standing list for promotion to SSG/E-6. The company commander, first sergeant, and the battalion command sergeant major formed negative opinions of him...