IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 17 June 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130015876
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 his promotion effective date (PED) for sergeant (SGT) be amended to show 1 March 2013.
2. The applicant states:
a. his promotion packet was sent to and entered onto the wrong Regional Support Command (RSC's) Permanent Promotion Recommended List (PPRL) in March 2013. He was promotable on the February PPRL and there were slots available in his region. Due to him being put on the wrong list and his mileage (willing to travel) not being accurate, he was not slotted and promoted in February and he did not receive pay for his entitled grade.
b. he submitted his promotion packet in February 2013. The packet was approved to be placed on the PPRL and he was placed on the 88th RSC's PPRL.
c. his home of record is San Diego, California; however, he was mobilized at the time that the packet was submitted to the board so he was placed on the PPRL for his current (mobilized) address in the state of Washington. He realized this discrepancy when another mobilized Soldier from his home of record was placed and slotted on the correct PPRL for the 63rd RSC. He and the other Soldier hold the same military occupational specialty (MOS) and the applicant at the time had more time in grade and time in service over the other Soldier. The other Soldier was promoted the following month.
d. he requested assistance to get his promotion packet transferred to the correct PPRL. By mid June 2013, he received notification he had been added to the list for July. When the PPRL for July 2013 posted he noticed he was slotted for E-5 and he was informed he would receive promotion orders shortly after. He received his promotion order, dated 9 August 2013, with a PED of 1 August 2013.
e. if his packet had been sent to the correct RSC, he would have been slotted for E-5 and promoted in the month of March.
3. The applicant provides:
* Promotion orders, dated 9 August 2013
* 88th RSC PPRL for February 2013
* 63rd RSC "Slotted" Soldiers for March 2013
* Email traffic
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the USAR on 17 November 2008.
2. Headquarters, U.S. Army Reserve Command Orders 13-221-00079, dated
9 August 2013, show he was promoted to SGT effective 1 August 2013.
3. In the processing of this case, on 7 November 2103, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Personnel Management Division, Headquarters, U.S. Army Reserve Command, Fort Bragg, NC. The advisory official states:
a. in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), Soldiers recommended for promotion are integrated onto an order of merit list called a PPRL. These lists are managed by the servicing RSC for the geographic region. Then, as vacant positions are reported, the RSC will identify the first Soldier on the list that meets the reported requirements of these positions within their MOS and elected travel distance.
b. their records indicate the applicant was recommended for promotion to SGT and erroneously integrated onto the PPRL managed by the 88th RSC. This error caused a delay in promotion. Had he been integrated onto the PPRL managed by the 63rd RSC, he would have been promoted 1 July 2013 based on available vacancies within his MOS and elected mileage. Therefore, his promotion order has been amended to reflect a promotion effective date and date of rank of 1 July 2013.
4. Headquarters, U.S. Army Reserve Command Orders 13-305-00001, dated
1 November 2013, amended his promotion orders (Orders 13-221-00079) to show his PED as 1 July 2013.
5. On 13 November 2013, a copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for information and to allow him the opportunity to submit comment or a rebuttal. He responded that he was content with the results of the board.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant requests his promotion orders for SGT be amended to show his PED as 1 March 2013.
2. Evidence shows he was promoted to SGT effective 1 August 2013.
3. Evidence also shows he was recommended for promotion to SGT and erroneously integrated onto the PPRL managed by the 88th RSC. This error caused a delay in promotion. The advisory official states had the applicant been integrated onto the PPRL managed by the 63rd RSC, he would have been promoted 1 July 2013. As a result, his promotion orders to SGT were amended to show his PED as 1 July 2013.
4. His PED was corrected to show 1 July 2013 based on available vacancies within his MOS and elected mileage. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence on which to base amending his PED date to 1 March 2013.
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) AR20130015876
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130015876
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120018043
On 8 January 2011, the 63rd Regional Readiness Command (RRC) Reserve Component Promotion Board recommended her for promotion on 13 January 2011. c. according to Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), she was placed on the Permanent Promotion Recommended List (PPRL) because there was no vacant military occupational specialty (MOS) 68K (medical laboratory specialist) SGT position to slot her against for promotion. All Soldiers on the PPRL without a new DA Form 3355...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021279
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 2 June 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100021279 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant provides: * a self-authored memorandum to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), dated 6 August 2010 * MapQuest driving directions * a letter from his Representative in Congress, dated 21 June 2010 * a letter from Deputy Director, Deputy Chief of Staff, G1, Headquarters, U.S. Army Reserve Command (USARC), to his Member of Congress, dated 10...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130010496
The applicant provides: * email correspondence related to her delayed promotion * two DA Forms 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) * Orders Number 10-237-00027, dated 25 August 2010 * Memorandum, Request Date of Rank (DOR) Change, dated 8 January 2013 * Memorandum, Request DOR Change, dated 13 February 2013 * DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 13 February 2013 * DA Form 4187-1-R (Personnel Action Form Addendum), dated 14 January 2013 * Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000314
To be promoted to SGT the Soldier must * be in a promotable status per paragraph 1-10, of this regulation * be listed on a valid PPRL * be in the proper sequence order when promoted off the list * have a passing Army Physical Fitness Test score within 12 months of the date of the promotion order c. The procedures necessary to accomplish a promotion from the promotion recommended list will be as follows: * based on cumulative vacancy computations the unit will report a current or projected...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120017835
The applicant states: * he was notified by his unit command sergeant major (CSM) of the upcoming promotion board that convened on 2 September 2011 * he was also notified in writing that since he was in the Active Guard Reserve (AGR) program, his physical appearance before the promotion board was not required * he submitted all the necessary documents prior to the suspense date of 22 August 2011 and awaited notification from the board * his name was added to the SGT/SSG Report of Promotion...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011041
g. His recruiter told him he had to ship from Germany and he could keep an eye on him and that based on the orders so would his family. c. Records indicate the applicant was recommended for promotion to SGT in MOS 68Q by a promotion board in August 2010 and again in August 2011. The evidence shows he was promoted to SGT on 1 August 2012 in the USAR in MOS 68Q and he enlisted in the RA on 27 November 2012 for MOS 68Q.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120015304
c. Records indicate the applicant was recommended for promotion to SGM by the August 2006 Senior Enlisted Promotion Board and integrated onto the PPRL managed by the 99th RSC. A promotion is not valid and the promotion order will be revoked if the Soldier is not, or was not, in a promotable status on the effective date. Evidence shows the applicant was recommended for promotion to SGM by the August 2006 promotion board and he was integrated onto the PPRL.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006311
Records indicate the applicant, then a sergeant/pay grade E-5, was recommended for promotion to SSG/pay grade E-6 by a promotion board on 1 June 2013. He contends that none of the mobilized Soldiers returned to the unit or left the unit until January/March 2014. c. When his unit reported the vacancy in October 2013, he was not placed in a position that was being held for a mobilized Soldier. d. He contends that no other Soldier was promoted to the rank of SSG a month prior to his promotion board.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007586
The applicant's records show he was recommended for promotion to master sergeant by the August 2007 Senior Enlisted Promotion Board and integrated onto the PPRL managed by the 88th RRC. There is no evidence the applicant was placed in an E-8 position or that orders were published promoting him to pay grade E-8. c. Paragraph 5-44f of Army Regulation 600-8-19 states before submitting removal action, commanders will promptly advise the convening authority of any Soldier whose name appears on...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003865
The applicant requests her record be corrected to show she was promoted to sergeant/E-5 on 1 November 2011 vice 1 February 2012. The applicant provides the following documents in support of her request: * Electronic Mail (e-mail) Messages, dated between January and February 2012 * Promotion Packet * 16 September 2011 Promotion Board Proceedings Memorandum * Vacancy Lists CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. As confirmed by the USARC advisory opinion, the applicants promotion packet was...