BOARD DATE:	  28 July 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110003020 


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 correction of Part I (Administrative Data), item h (Period Covered) on two of her DA Forms 2166-8 (Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reports (NCOER)).

2.  She states that while reviewing her records for a recent promotion board, she discovered the original versions of two NCOERs that she had reviewed and signed were later modified with handwritten entries and filed in her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).  She attests her NCOER, dated 21 June 2005, rendered for the period 200502 thru 200505 was modified to read from 200501 thru 200505.  She contends that is not only incorrect, but impossible because she did not become an NCO until she was promoted to the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5 until 20050501.  

3.  She also attests her NCOER, dated 29 October 2007, rendered for the period 20061001 thru 20070930 was modified to read from 20061201 thru 20071130.  She contends that is not only incorrect, but it would result in a 1 month gap following her preceding NCOER for the period 20060601 thru 20061101 and a 2 month overlap with her following NCOER for the period 20071001 thru 20080808.

4.  She provides two NCOER appeal packets




CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s records show that following a period of service in the U.S. Army Reserve, she enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 November 1996 and has continued to serve through as series of immediate reenlistments.

2.  Her enlisted Record Brief shows she was promoted to the rank/grade of SGT/E-5 on 1 February 2005.

3.  Her OMPF contains an NCOER, dated 21 June 2005, which shows in Part I:

	a.  item c (Rank) SGT;

	b.  item d (Date of Rank (DOR)) 20050201; and

	c.  the typewritten entry of "200502" in the "From" portion of Part I, item h has been lined out and modified to read "200501."

4.  Her OMPF contains two uncontested subsequent NCOERs which show her rank as SGT and her DOR as 20050201.  Part I, item h of these forms indicate they were rendered for the following periods:

* from 200506 thru 200605
* from 20060601 thru 20061101

5.  Her OMPF contains an NCOER, dated 29 October 2007, which shows her rank as SGT and her DOR as 20050201.  Part I, item h shows:

	a.  the typewritten entry of "20061001" in the "From" portion has been lined out and modified to read "20061201" and

	b.  the typewritten entry of "20070930" in the "Thru" portion has been lined out and modified to read "20071130."

6.  Her OMPF contains three uncontested subsequent NCOERs.  Part I, item h of these forms indicate they were rendered for the following periods:

* from 20071001 thru 20080808
* from 20080809 thru 20090808
* from 20090809 thru 20100808


7.  The applicant provides copies of two appeals she submitted to the Appeals and Corrections Section of U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) on 15 December 2010 in an effort to correct the aforementioned administrative errors.  She submitted copies of the unmodified NCOERs she had reviewed and signed as evidence.

8.  On 6 January 2011, a representative of the HRC Appeals and Corrections Section informed the applicant that her appeals were being returned without action based upon the fact they were not received within 3 years of the "thru" dates on the NCOERs.  He also advised the applicant to submit a request for relief to this Board.

9.  Army Regulation 623-205 (Evaluation Reporting System), in effect at the time, established the policies and procedures for the preparation and submission of the NCOERs for corporals through command sergeants major.  Paragraph 4-2 provided that an evaluation report accepted for inclusion in the official record of the NCO is presumed to be administratively correct, to have been prepared by the properly designated rating officials, and to represent the considered opinion and objective judgment of the rating officials at the time of preparation.  Paragraph 4-7 of that regulation states that the burden of proof in an appeal of an NCOER rests with the applicant.  Accordingly, to justify deletion or amendment of a report, the applicant must produce evidence that establishes clearly and convincingly that the presumption of regularity should not be applied to the report under consideration and that action is warranted to correct a material error, inaccuracy, or injustice.  Paragraph 6-4 provides that each report will be an independent evaluation of the rated NCO for a specific rating period.

10.  Army Regulation 623-205, Table 3-1 (Administrative data NCOER instructions) provides:

	a.  An NCO's first report period begins on the effective date of promotion to sergeant, reversion to NCO status after serving as a commissioned or warrant officer for 12 months or more, reentry on active duty after a break in service of 12 months or more, or the date of the ABCMR memorandum that approves reinstatement of a promotion.

	b.  For subsequent reports, the "Period Covered" is the period extending from the day after the "Thru" date of the last report to the date of the event causing the report to be written.  The rating period is that period within the "Period Covered" during which the rated NCO serves in the same position under the same rater who is writing the report.  The "Period Covered" and the rating period always end on the same date (the "Thru" date of the report).  The beginning date of the rating period may not be the same as that of the "Period Covered" (the "From" date).

	c.  The rated NCO's signature verifies the following: They seen the completed report, the administrative data (Part I) is correct (except Part Ik through o), the rating officials are proper (Part II), the duty description is accurate (Part III) and includes the counseling dates, the APFT and height/weight entries are correct (Part IVc), and that the rated NCO is aware of the appeals process.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contentions that Part I, item h on two of her NCOERs should be corrected to properly reflect the periods covered were carefully considered and determined to have merit.

2.  Evidence clearly shows she was promoted to the rank/grade of SGT effective 20050201.  Accordingly, her initial NCOER, dated 21 June 2005, was rendered with a "From" date of 200502 in order to correspond with the date she became an NCO.  She reviewed the report for administrative accuracy and it was authenticated with the signatures of her and the rating chain then forwarded for processing.

3.  The version of this NCOER which is filed in her OMPF shows the typewritten entry of "200502" in the "From" portion of Part I, item h has been lined out and modified to read "200501."  This handwritten entry implies the rating period began a month prior to the applicant becoming an NCO and is clearly in error.  Therefore, she is entitled to correction of the NCOER to show the period covered was from 200502 thru 200505.

4.  Evidence clearly shows she received an NCOER, dated 29 October 2007, rendered for the 12-month period from 20061001 thru 20070930.  She reviewed the report for administrative accuracy and it was authenticated with the signatures of her and the rating chain then forwarded for processing.

5.  The version of this NCOER which is filed in her OMPF shows the typewritten entry of "20061001" in the "From" portion has been lined out and modified to read "20061201" and the typewritten entry of "20070930" in the "Thru" portion has been lined out and modified to read "20071130."  These handwritten entries resulted in a 1 month gap following her preceding NCOER for the period 20060601 thru 20061101 and a 2 month overlap with her following NCOER for the period 20071001 thru 20080808; and are clearly in error.  Therefore, she is entitled to correction of the NCOER to show the period covered was from 20061102 thru 20070930, a period of 11 months.



BOARD VOTE:

___x_____  ____x____  ____x____  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined the evidence presented is 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.  deleting the current entry in the "From" portion of Part I, item h of her NCOER, dated 21 June 2005, and replacing it with the entry "200502";

	b.  deleting the current entry in the "From" portion of Part I, item h of her NCOER, dated 29 October 2007, and replacing it with the entry "20061102"; 

	c.  deleting the current entry in the "Thru" portion of Part I, item h of her NCOER, dated 29 October 2007, and replacing it with the entry "20070930"; and

	d.  deleting the current entry in Part I, item i (Rated Months) of her NCOER, dated 29 October 2007, and replacing it with the entry "11."



      _______ _  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)                                         AR20110003020





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110003020



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1