Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006504
Original file (20130006504.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  3 December 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130006504 


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 his records be corrected to show that he was promoted to the rank of sergeant (SGT).

2.  The applicant states that he completed the Primary Noncommissioned Officer Course (PNCOC) and the promotion review board but did not receive his promotion to the rank of SGT.

3.  The applicant provides his DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) and a DA Form 2496-1 (Disposition Form) showing that he was scheduled for appearance before a promotion review board. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 July 1977 for a period of      3 years and training as a combat engineer.  He completed his one-station unit training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri and was transferred to Fort Sill, Oklahoma for his first assignment.  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 21 October 1978.

3.  On 4 February 1979, he was transferred to Germany, and on 30 August 1979 he completed PNCOC.

4.  On 8 July 1980, he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) in the pay grade of E-4.  He had served 2 years, 11 months, and 27 days of active service. 

5.  A review of his official records failed to show evidence of the applicant attaining promotion list standing or meeting the promotion cut-off score.

6.  Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), in effect at the time, served as the authority for the promotion of enlisted personnel.  It provides, in pertinent part, that individuals must attain promotion list standing and meet the Department of the Army announced cut-off score for their military occupational specialty (MOS) in order to be promoted to the pay grade of E-5.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that he should have been promoted to the pay grade of E-5 prior to his REFRAD has been noted.  However, the applicant has failed to show through the evidence of record and evidence submitted with his application that he attained promotion list standing and met the Department of the Army announced cut-off score for his MOS.

2.  Therefore, in the absence of such evidence there appears to be no basis to grant his request to be promoted.

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)                                         AR20130006504





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130006504



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004974C070205

    Original file (20060004974C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his report of separation (DD Form 214) be corrected to reflect his rank and pay grade as a sergeant (SGT) E-5, that his award of the Imjin Scout Certificate be added to his awards and that his military occupational specialty (MOS) be corrected to reflect the Special Qualification Identifier (SQI) of “F” to denote flying qualifications. Army Regulation 611-201 serves as the authority for award of the SQI. Inasmuch as there is no evidence to show that he appeared...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005048

    Original file (20140005048.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show his military education and that he was promoted to sergeant (SGT)/pay grade E-5. Therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show this military education. Thus, the evidence of record shows the applicant's DD Form 214 shows his correct rank, grade, and effective date.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003698

    Original file (20110003698.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    There are no orders or other evidence in the applicant's military personnel records that shows he was promoted to pay grade E-5. The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show he was promoted to pay grade E-5 because he was recommended for promotion, but when he was reassigned his records were lost and, as a result, he was not promoted. c. There is no evidence of record to show the applicant was promoted to the grade of E-5 during the period of service under review.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | AR20140009130

    Original file (AR20140009130 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, in the absence of such evidence, there appears to be no error or injustice or a basis to grant his request. 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024804

    Original file (20100024804.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    While the sincerity of the applicant’s claim that he met the promotion cut-off score for promotion to the pay grade of E-6 prior to his discharge is not in question, he has failed to show through sufficient evidence submitted with his application and the evidence of record that such was the case. Not only is there no evidence to show that he ever appeared before a promotion selection board, there is insufficient evidence to show that he was otherwise qualified for promotion. In order to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008308

    Original file (20130008308.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show: * the Driver and Mechanic Badge with Driver Bar * the Basic Leadership School Ribbon, i.e., the Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Professional Development Ribbon * the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5 2. The applicant provides: * DD Form 214 * DD Form 4 (Enlistment or Reenlistment Agreement - Armed Forces of the United States) * DA Form 2A (Personnel Qualification Record - Part...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014393

    Original file (20110014393.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20100024804, on 14 April 2011. The applicant’s record is void of any evidence and he has not provided any evidence which shows he ever appeared before a promotion selection board. While there is no evidence to show that such was the case here, there is no evidence to explain why he...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021671

    Original file (20110021671.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant states that in May 2000, while undergoing Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) processing she maintained her promotion standing list status by submitting awards, civilian, and military education documents. The evidence of record confirms the applicant did not have a current APFT score in May 2002 and her promotion point total was adjusted to 396 points.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012927

    Original file (20130012927.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his application, the applicant provides the following documents: a. a copy of a DA Form 2496, dated 1 November 1968, that shows the Executive Officer, Company B, 3rd Battalion, 1st Infantry, 11th Infantry Brigade, recommended the applicant for promotion to SSG (E-6). Specifically, there is no evidence the applicant appeared before a promotion board, that he was recommended for promotion by the board, and placed on the E-6 promotion list. c. Therefore, based on the evidence of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100027892

    Original file (20100027892.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Promotion boards, promotion point calculation, and promotion list maintenance is handled in the field. In this case, there is no evidence the applicant was ever recommended for promotion by a local promotion board; that he was on a promotion standing list; and/or that he met a monthly promotion cut-off score during his active duty tenure.