BOARD DATE:	  20 August 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130006284 


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 his record to show he was promoted and subsequently retired in the rank/grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6. 

2.  The applicant states:

* he believes the record to be in error or unjust due to discrimination and inadequate organization of direct supervision
* he earned the promotion
* the injustice lies within the leadership at the time
* he deserves the credit
* his records show it

3.  The applicant provides:

* a memorandum issued by Headquarters, 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Carson, CO, subject:  Report of Promotion Board Proceedings for Promotions to sergeant (SGT) and SSG, dated
14 November 2008
* DA Form 2166-8 (NCO [Noncommissioned Officer] Evaluation Report (NCOER))


CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 April 2003.  He completed training and he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (infantryman).  He was promoted to SGT effective 1 May 2006.

2.  He provides a memorandum, dated 14 November 2008, that indicates:

* a promotion board convened on 14 November 2008 to review records and interview personnel for promotion to SGT and SSG
* he was recommended for promotion to SSG in MOS 11B
* the list of Soldiers recommended for promotion, including the applicant's name, be integrated into the recommended list

3.  On 20 June 2010, he was retired by reason of temporary disability in the rank of SGT.  He was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) on the following day.

4.  Orders D321-05, issued by the U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency, Arlington, VA, dated 16 November 2012, removed the applicant from the TDRL effective 16 November 2012 placed him on the permanent Retired List by reason of permanent physical disability, in the rank of SGT, with an 80 percent disability percentage.

5.  In the processing of this case, on 30 April 2013, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Department of the Army Promotions, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), Fort Knox, KY.  The advisory official recommends the applicant's request be disapproved.  The opinion states:

	a.  the records available to the Junior Enlisted Promotion section indicate the applicant's promotion record did not reflect any promotion points at the time of his separation.

	b.  HRC provides two emails that indicate there were no promotion points in the applicant's records.

6.  On 16 May 2013, the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for information and to allow him the opportunity to submit comments or a rebuttal.  He did not respond.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), chapter 3, provides the rules and steps for managing the semicentralized promotion system to SGT and SSG.  It states:
	a.  Promotion to SGT and SSG are executed in a semicentralized manner.

	b.  Field operations will handle board appearance, promotion point calculation, promotion list maintenance, and the final execution of the promotions occur in the field in a decentralized manner.

	c.  Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) operations will handle promotion cutoff scores and the monthly SGT/SSG promotion selection by-name list, which are determined and announced monthly.

	d.  HQDA and HRC will determine the needs of the Army by grade and MOS.

	e.  A Soldier's total points are forwarded through the appropriate database, as determined by HRC to the automated system.  These points are consolidated into an Army-wide listing of eligible Soldiers by MOS maintained in the automated system.  A determination is then made for each MOS as to what promotion point cutoff score would promote the desired number of Soldiers to meet the needs of the Army in a specific month.  These decisions are based primarily upon budget constraints and individual MOS requirements.

	f.  The importance of accuracy and timeliness in submission of data to the database cannot be overemphasized.  Only visible scores will be considered.

	g.  By using the standard promotion scoring forms, with predetermined promotion point factors, Soldiers in pay grades specialist/corporal and SGT generally can measure how well they qualify for promotion.  They can set precise goals with a self-improvement training program to increase their potential for promotion.

	h.  The semicentralized promotion system depends on the sequential execution of the key events listed in this chapter.  Untimely action in the field leads to inaccurate promotion decisions.

	i.  If the promotion authority is a general officer he or she may delegate, in writing, his or her promotion authority to the deputy commander or the senior personnel manager.  The person to whom the promotion authority is delegated must be a field grade officer, filling a lieutenant colonel or higher-coded position.

8.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1372 states that any member of an armed force who is retired for physical disability or whose name is placed on the TDRL is entitled to the grade equivalent to the highest of the following:

	a.  the grade of rank in which he/she is serving on the date when his/her name is placed on the TDRL or the date he/she is retired

	b.  the highest temporary grade or rank in which he/she served satisfactorily, as determined by the Secretary of the armed force from which he/she is retired;

	c.  the permanent regular or reserve grade to which he/she would have been promoted had it not been for the physical disability for which he/she is retired and which was found to exist as a result of a physical examination; or

	d.  the temporary grade to which he/she would have been promoted had it not been for the physical disability for which he/she is retired, if eligibility for that promotion was required to be based on cumulative years of service or years of service in grade and the disability was discovered as a result of a physical examination.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no evidence and the applicant provides no evidence that shows he was the victim of discrimination.

2.  Although he provides a memorandum showing he was recommended for promotion to SSG by a local promotion selection board in 2008, there is no corroborating evidence that shows he was properly integrated onto the promotion standing list or promoted prior to his placement on the TDRL on 21 June 2010.  In fact, there is no indication that he was in a promotable status at the time he was placed on the TDRL.

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

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)                                         AR20130006284



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130006284



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1