Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018444
Original file (20100018444.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  10 March 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100018444


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, in effect, an adjustment of his date of rank (DOR) to SGT/E-5 to 15 June 2009 with entitlement to all back pay and allowances. 

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  his chain of command assured him he would be promoted to the pay grade of E-5 with back pay;

	b.  he reenlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) in the rank of specialist four (E-4) 1 year ago after a 10-year break in service, and he chose to reenlist as a drill sergeant in hopes of bringing his life experiences to new recruits;

	c.  he was informed he would be required to complete a 2-month drill service course in order to be qualified to fill a vacancy slot in the unit;

	d.  after returning from the Warrior Leadership Course (WLC), his promotion packet was assembled and presented to the promotion board on 15 June 2009, and he was approved for promotion;

	e.  his next mission was to complete Drill Sergeant School (DSS) and his unit obtained a slot for him to attend with a start date of 24 January 2010;



	f.  he told his unit commander he was mission ready and capable to complete DSS but it would create a financial hardship on his family to be activated for 
2 months while he was only receiving E-4 pay;

	g.  his command assured him that if he attended school his pay issues would be resolved.  In good faith he attended school and secured personal loans in excess of $2,500 to provide for his family until his pay issue was straightened out;

	h.  he completed the course and he spent approximately $800.00 on cold weather gear and other miscellaneous items that should have been issued to him by his unit;

	i.  after returning to his unit he was told his promotion packet was being resubmitted which would put his promotion date back almost 1 year later than it should have been.  He was also told he would not be entitled to any back pay; and

   j.  he enjoys being a drill sergeant; however, he does not enjoy the hardship it has created due to what he believes was a failure by his unit.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored letter, dated 31 March 2010; promotion orders dated 29 June 2010; reassignment orders, dated 29 June 2010; DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), dated 23 August 1999; transition orders, dated 23 June 1999; reassignment orders, dated 9 June 1999; his Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States; his Promotion Point Worksheet, dated 1 June 2009; his Promotion Packet Composition, Elections and Preferences Form; his Unit Administrative Review; his Promotion Consideration Statement; and email between him and numerous USAR officials.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  With prior service in the Regular Army and the Army National Guard, the applicant enlisted in the USAR on 6 December 2008, in the pay grade of E-4.  

2.  His Selected Reserve Incentive Program – USAR Prior Service Enlistment Bonus Addendum shows he contracted to serve in a USAR Selected Reserve Troop Program Unit (TPU) as a drill sergeant.  His Certificate of Acknowledgment USAR Service Requirements and Methods of Fulfillment shows the TPU in which he enlisted was Detachment 1, 2nd Battalion, 330th Regiment, for a unit vacancy in Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 11B (Infantryman).  

3.  The applicant completed the WLC on 2 May 2009 and his promotion consideration packet was completed on 1 June 2009.

4.  Email correspondence submitted by the applicant shows he was recommended for promotion by a Junior Promotion Board on 7 June 2009.

5.  The applicant's records show he completed the Drill Sergeant Course on 20 March 2010.

6.  On 29 June 2010, Headquarters, 88th Regional Support Command Orders 10-180-00183 were published releasing him from Detachment 1, 2nd Battalion, 330th Regiment and assigning him to the 377th Combat Support Company, 2nd Platoon, effective 1 August 2010.  These orders show the reassignment was based on his acceptance of a promotion into that position/unit.

7.  On 29 June 2010, Headquarters, 88th Regional Support Command Orders 10-180-00182 were published awarding him MOS 91H2O (Optical Laboratory Specialist) and promoting him to the pay grade of E-5, effective 1 July 2010.  These orders state the promotion was not valid and would not be effective if he was not in a promotable status on the effective date of the promotion.  The orders also state that by accepting the position, he understood he must report for duty in the position to which he was promoted, comply with the reassignment order, if issued, and serve at least 12 months in the duty position "WSM9A2, POSN 0310, PARA/LIN 108/05" before voluntary reassignment to another TPU.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), chapter 5 prescribes policy and procedures for promotion to SGT and staff sergeant (SSG). It states to standardize promotion qualification throughout the Army Reserve and to ensure promotion of the best qualified Soldiers, recommendation by a promotion selection board and placement on a permanent recommended promotion list is required for all promotions to SGT and SSG.  It further states the following:

	a.  All specialists, corporals, and sergeants who meet the basic eligibility requirements cited in paragraph 5–7 (Eligibility for Promotion Selection Board Consideration) of this regulation may be recommended for promotion selection board consideration by their commander;

	b.  The promotion selection board will consider Soldiers recommended for promotion and select fully qualified Soldiers for placement on the permanent recommended promotion list using a promotion point scoring system prescribed by this section without regard to position vacancies;

	c.  Soldiers will be promoted in their recommended MOS sequentially from the list to fill TPU duty position vacancy requirements in accordance with this regulation; and 

	d.  Promotions off the permanent recommended promotion list will not exceed the cumulative vacancies for that pay grade.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contentions and his supporting documents have been considered.  However, there is no evidence in the available records showing he was in a promotable status in June 2009.

2.  His records show that at the time he enlisted in the USAR he was assigned to Detachment 1, 2nd Battalion, 330th Regiment, in MOS 11B.  His records also show that he was not reassigned to the 377th Combat Support Company, 2nd Platoon until 1 August 2010.  The orders were published on 29 June 2010 and they show the reassignment was based on his acceptance of a promotion into that position/unit.

3.  He was awarded MOS 91H2O and promoted to the pay grade of E-5 effective 1 July 2010.  These orders were also published on 29 June 2010. 

4.  The fact that he was considered and recommended for promotion in June 2009 is not a sufficient basis for adjusting his date of promotion.  His name was placed on a promotion list using a promotion point scoring system prescribed by Army Regulation 600-8-19.  He was promoted sequentially based on his MOS and the number of vacancies for his pay grade.

5.  The available evidence suggests that he was not in a promotable status until he accepted his assignment in the 377th Combat Support Company, 2nd Platoon.  Therefore, the applicant's request should be denied.

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)                                         AR20090005994



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100018444



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019947

    Original file (20090019947.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The advisory official stated that after a thorough review of the applicant's records, his office recommends his reinstatement to the rank of SFC with the understanding that he will not be eligible for promotion to master sergeant (MSG) until he completes all required NCO education courses. Neither promotion order indicates his promotion was conditional upon completion of NCOES. a. Paragraph 1-27 (NCOES Requirement for Promotion and Conditions Promotion) states that a Soldier must be a WLC...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100027840

    Original file (20100027840.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    These orders further show that upon his release from active duty he was required to: a. inform the 108th Training Command (IET) G-1 Enlisted Management Branch by email that he was no longer on active duty; b. report to his assigned unit (498th Transportation Company, position 0150/ paragraph 103/line 02) in MOS 88M4O as a platoon sergeant in Mobile, AL; c. understand that as a condition of this promotion he must transfer to the above position and remain in that position for 12 months from...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004001

    Original file (20110004001.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He submitted various email exchange with his unit S-1, AMEDD career manager, and others that show: * 21 October 2008, his career manager advised him that his records would be considered by the January 2009 CPT AMEDD Reserve Components Board * 6 June 2009, his unit S-1 informed him he was not in a valid position and that he was assigned to the TTHS for medical reasons * 8 June 2009, he acknowledged the TTHS assignment but stated the medical issue had been resolved since the Department of...

  • 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 | CY2013 | 20130009470

    Original file (20130009470.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provided three UMRs, dated 2 June 2010, 24 August 2010, and 16 July 2011, which show: a. MSG CJ also stated that the applicant must complete the attached counseling and, by 27 May 2012, be reassigned to a valid position that meets COE and grade requirements or be subject to involuntary transfer to another unit, to the IRR, or elect retirement. (i) As a COE (MILTECH 365th) and in order to meet the senior grade overstrength guidance, she took a reduction in rank from SGM/E-9 to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019413

    Original file (20140019413.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides: * a memorandum, dated 8 July 2010, from HRC, subject: Notification of Eligibility for Retired Pay at Age 60 (20-year Letter) * emails, dated 5-20 May 2011, concerning his assignment to the 224th MP Company, Phoenix, AZ * a memorandum for record (MFR), dated 15 October 2011, from Division West, Building, McGregor Range, Fort Bliss, TX * two DA Forms 4856 (Developmental Counseling Form), dated 10 November 2011 * a DA Form 4651 (Request for Reserve Component Assignment...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004644C070208

    Original file (20040004644C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received a call from his unit and was told the Command decided to reduce him to the rank of Sergeant First Class (SFC), E-7 and send him to the Inactive Ready Reserve. Section IV (Promotion to SFC, MSG, and Sergeant Major) of Army Regulation 140-158, paragraph 3-28c states that all Soldiers assigned to a TPU who reside within a reasonable distance of a current or projected position vacancy will be considered by the promotion selection board. The applicant had been promoted to MSG to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120011219

    Original file (20120011219.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Counsel requests: * the applicant's records be submitted to an Army Standby Advisory Board (STAB) for consideration for promotion to sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 * if the applicant is selected, he be promoted to SFC/E-7 with the date of rank (DOR) he would have received had he been selected by the Fiscal Year 2011 (FY11) Senior Enlisted Promotion Board * the applicant be paid back pay and allowances from the date he would have been promoted had he been selected by the FY11 Senior Enlisted...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120019015

    Original file (20120019015.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    (2) Paragraph 3-28b states senior enlisted promotions result when data is provided to the promotion authority that reflects requirements based on current and projected position vacancies; the promotion authority announces the convening date of the selection board, location and description of current and projected position vacancies, zones of consideration for promotion selection, and administrative instructions; personnel records of Soldiers within the zone of consideration are reviewed by...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026346

    Original file (20100026346.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    b. paragraph 5–43 states enlisted standby advisory boards will consider records of Soldiers on whom derogatory information has been properly substantiated, which may warrant removal from a selection list. c. paragraph 5-35 states a Soldier removed from a promotion selection list and later considered exonerated will be reinstated on the promotion selection list. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: * Setting...