IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 16 May 2013
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130005918
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 that the DA Form 1059 (Academic Evaluation Report (AER)) dated 30 March 2007 be removed from his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR), formerly known as the Official Military Personnel File, and replaced with the corrected copy of the same form.
2. The applicant states the DA Form 1059 currently contained in his interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) for the period ending on 30 March 2007 contains a marginal rating; however, a corrected copy of the DA Form 1059 was prepared by the Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Academy showing he achieved course standards. However, the original DA Form 1059 still remains in his iPERMS and the corrected copy has not been added. He goes on to state that he went to the Advanced NCO Course (ANCOC) immediately after returning from deployment to Iraq and did not pass his Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT); however, he passed the retest. He also states that All Army Activities (ALARACT) Message 075-2007 states that Soldiers enrolled in institutional training courses from 2 October 2006 to
31 March 2007 who failed the APFT retest or height/weight standards will have their DA Form 1059 marked as having achieved course standards. When he discovered that he could have the change made to his records he was again deployed and was unable to make the changes to his records until now.
3. The applicant provides a Memorandum for Record from the Chief of Training at the NCO Academy, a corrected DA Form 1059, and a copy of ALARACT Message 075-2007.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. After serving a year in the California Army National Guard, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 November 1992 for a period of 3 years and training as a cannon crewman. He completed his training and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments. He was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 1 December 2006.
2. His records show he deployed to Iraq from 2006 to 2007 and again for 1 year on 7 November 2010.
3. The applicant attended The Army Training System (TATS) Field Artillery Platoon Sergeant ANCOC at Fort Sill, Oklahoma during the period 2 March 2007 30 March 2007. The DA Form 1059 issued to the applicant indicates he Marginally Achieved Course Standards due to failing the APFT; however, he passed the retest.
4. The corrected copy of the DA Form 1059 issued by the NCO Academy indicates he Achieved Course Standards.
5. A review of his NCO Evaluation Reports shows no evidence of an APFT failure.
6. The Memorandum for Record provided by the applicant with his application authored by the Chief of Training at the NCO Academy indicates the corrected copy of the DA Form 1059 was issued in accordance with the instructions provided in ALARACT Message 075-2007 and agrees that the corrected copy of the DA Form 1059 should replace the original DA Form 1059 contained in his records.
7. Army Regulation 623-1 establishes the policies and procedures for the Academic Evaluation Reporting System. It provides, in pertinent part, that a DA Form 1059 (AER) will be prepared for all enlisted personnel taking resident and nonresident Noncommissioned Officer Education System (NCOES) courses (regardless of length or component). A copy of the AER will be forwarded for filing in the performance fiche of the individuals OMPF within 60 days after completion of the report.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicants contention that the DA Form 1059 dated 30 March 2007 should be replaced with the corrected copy of the DA Form 1059 for the same course has been noted and appears to have merit.
2. The Corrected Copy was issued by the same institution that issued the original DA Form 1059 and contains a letter of explanation surrounding the issuance of the Corrected Copy.
3. Accordingly, the original DA Form 1059 should be removed from his official records and replaced with the corrected copy.
BOARD VOTE:
___X____ ___X___ ___X____ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The Board determined that the evidence presented was 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 removing the DA Form 1059 (AER) ending on 30 March 2007 currently in his AMHRR and replacing it with the corrected copy of the same form.
_______ _ 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) AR20130005918
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130005918
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007793
In accordance with (IAW) All Army Activities (ALARACT) Message 075/007 this DA Form 1059 should have been corrected. This form shows the comment "Soldier met academic requirements, but failed to meet APFT standards IAW Army Regulation 350-1 [Army Training and Leader Development] during the course" in Item 11C. He was issued a DA Form 1059 which showed he met academic requirements, but failed to meet APFT standards.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003319
The applicant requests the DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER)), dated 26 February 2008, be expunged from his record or in the alternative, transfer to the restricted section of his official military personnel file (OMPF). The applicant provides: * three DA Forms 1059, dated 26 February 2008, 22 May 2008, and 26 August 2008 * two DA Forms 2166-8 (Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Evaluation Report (NCOER), for the period 1 April 2007 through 31 March 2008 and 1 April...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007483
The applicant requests removal of the DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 19 January 2007, from her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). Accordingly, as required by the applicable regulation at the time, she was issued a DA Form 1059 that shows she marginally achieved course standards in that she met the academic requirements but failed to meet body fat standards IAW AR 600-9 during this course. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003504
The applicant states, in effect: * he sustained injuries to his collarbone and knee about 3 years before attending ANCOC [sic, ANCOC attendance was 4 years and 5 months after injury occurred; injury in June 2004, ANCOC in December 2008] * it resulted from a malicious act of another, for which he was awarded $30,000.00 * he was a recruiter at the time and, because he was 6 hours from the nearest military installation, he was never able to have his injuries evaluated for a profile by a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120020635
The applicant states he was told his DA Form 1059 was marked, "Marginally Achieved Course Standards" because he failed to meet height and weight standards according to Army Regulation 600-9 (The Army Weight Control Program). Soldiers who failed to meet the body fat standards of Army Regulation 600-9 would be considered an academic course graduate, but item 11c of their DA Form 1059 would be marked "Marginally Achieved Course Standards" and item 14 would be marked "Failed to Meet Body Fat...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013563
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015921
The applicant requests, in effect, amendment of the DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER)), dated 18 August 2006, that is filed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The rater documented the applicant's academic performance average for ANCOC of 95.8% and that he passed the APFT on 6 August 2006 in item 14 of the DA Form 1059. The rater also provided comments in item 14 of the DA Form 1059 about the applicant's leadership capabilities and overall...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007257
The applicant requests correction of her DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER)) for the Warrior Leader Course (WLC) (hereafter referred to as the contested AER) to show in item 11d (Performance Summary) "Marginally Achieved Course Standards." In accordance with Army Regulation 350-1 (Army Training and Leader Development), paragraph 3-12g, Soldiers enrolled in institutional training courses from 10 August to 30 September 2006 who failed an Army Physical Fitness Test...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007257
The applicant requests correction of her DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER)) for the Warrior Leader Course (WLC) (hereafter referred to as the contested AER) to show in item 11d (Performance Summary) "Marginally Achieved Course Standards." In accordance with Army Regulation 350-1 (Army Training and Leader Development), paragraph 3-12g, Soldiers enrolled in institutional training courses from 10 August to 30 September 2006 who failed an Army Physical Fitness Test...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100824C070212
The applicant requests that her date of rank (DOR) and effective date for promotion to the pay grade of E-7 be changed back to her original promotion date of 1 September 2000. The applicant states, in effect, that she was conditionally promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 1 September 2000 and attended the Advanced Noncommissoned Officer Course (ANCOC) at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, on 8 April 2002. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation...