BOARD DATE:  16 October 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140000141 


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 to the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5 with a date of rank (DOR) and effective date of 1 July 2013 instead of 1 December 2013.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he went before a promotion board for SGT on 
2 May 2013.  He was eligible for promotion effective 1 July 2013; however an erroneous Flag was in the system and he wasn’t promoted until 1 December 2013.  He was fully qualified for promotion, the Flag was erroneous, and he should not be disadvantaged for something that was not his fault.

3.  The applicant provides:

* DA Form 268 (Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (FLAG)), dated 23 October 2012
* DA Form 3355 (Promotion Point Worksheet (United States Army Reserve), dated 2 May 2013
* DA Form 268, dated 25 August 2013
* SGT promotion orders, dated 25 November 2013

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is a SGT in the Active Guard Reserve (AGR) program.  He last served on active duty from 28 April 1999 to 7 January 2003.


2.  The applicant provides:

	a.  A DA Form 268, dated 23 October 2012, showing a 20 October 2012 Flag was removed effective 20 October 2012 "Disciplinary action taken."

	b.  A DA Form 3355, dated 2 May 2013, showing he was recommended for promotion to SGT with 421 promotion points.

	c.  A DA Form 268, dated 25 August 2013, showing the 20 October 2012 Flag was removed effective 20 October 2012 "Case Closed favorably."

	d.  Orders 13-329-00059, Headquarters, 63rd Regional Support Command, dated 25 November 2013, announcing he was promoted to SGT effective 
1 December 2013.

3.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion, dated 24 September 2014, was obtained from the Chief, DA Promotions, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC).  The advisory official recommended denial of the applicant's request because "The records available to the Junior Enlisted Promotions section indicate (the applicant's) promotion points were not input into the Active Guard Reserve Management Information System (AGRMIS) prior to 26 May 2013 by the 63rd Regional Support Command.  As a result (the applicant) was not placed on the Headquarters, Department of the Army promotion by-name list for 1 July 2013.  

4.  On 26 September 2014, a copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for information and to allow him to submit comments or a rebuttal.  His 26 September 2014 response states:

	a.  There should be more explanation as to why his promotion points were not input into AGRMIS prior to 26 May 2013 (this is in violation of Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), and what is being done to ensure this violation does not occur again. 

	b.  AR 600-8-19, paragraph 1-11 (Delay of promotion due to suspension of favorable personnel actions for Soldiers on a centralized promotion list).  When a delay of promotion has occurred because of suspension of favorable personnel actions, the following rules apply once the final DA Form 268 has been prepared. The Soldier’s promotion status will be determined as follows:

	c.  If the FLAG is lifted with the disposition, case is closed favorably, and he or she would have been promoted while the suspension of favorable personnel actions was in effect, provided otherwise qualified, he or she will be promoted.  Effective date and date of rank (DOR) will be the date the Soldier would otherwise have been promoted. 

	d.  The advisory opinion does not specify the reason the promotion was delayed until 1 December 2013. 

	e.  A Lieutenant W___ had her promotion back dated recently by HRC due to a Flag issue.  My attempts to resolve this issue at a lower level were not successful (see attached email notes).  

	f.  The regulations were not followed in this instance, and therefore, it is inappropriate to deny correction of his promotion.  Where the rights of individuals are affected, it is incumbent upon agencies to follow their own procedural mandates; plain legal error exists.  Please correct the plain legal error and grant full relief.

5.  AR 600-8-19 prescribes the policies and procedures governing the promotion and reduction of Army enlisted personnel.

	a.  Chapter 3 (Semi-Centralized Promotions (SGT and Staff Sergeant (SSG)) governs the SGT and SSG promotion process.  Promotions to SGT and SSG are executed in a semi-centralized manner.  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 Armywide 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.

	b.  Paragraph 1-10 (Nonpromotable Status) provides that Soldiers (specialist (SPC)/E-4 through master sergeant (MSG)/E-8) are nonpromotable to a higher grade when they have incurred a FLAG under the provisions of AR 600-8-2 (Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions (FLAG)).  Table 3-10 (Promotion standing list removal reason codes) shows Soldiers will be removed from the promotion standing list when an adverse action exists, as indicated by a suspension of favorable actions.

6.  Military Personnel (MILPER) Message 11-233 contains the following pertinent information.  It states in paragraph 5 "administrative records corrections (ARC) is a new process aimed at achieving personnel/training database accuracy used to establish SSG and SGT promotions effective 1 June 2011 and later.  In cases that would previously require an ETP due to an unavoidable circumstance and is no fault of the Solider, S1, MPD or promotions work center, the promotion authority may submit a request for an ARC.  The request must be fully justified, signed by the promotion authority, and submitted to this office for approval.  All supporting documentation specific to the request must be attached or the request will be returned without action."  

	a.  Paragraph 5a states "Soldiers may be eligible for a retroactive promotion under the Administrative Records Corrections (ARC) process if he/he would have made the DA promotion point cutoff score, but was in a suspension of favorable action status and he/he was exonerated, the case was closed favorably, or a FLAG for adverse action was removed, provided the Soldier was otherwise qualified."

	b.  Paragraph 5b states : "Failure on behalf of the Soldier, Unit, MPD or Promotion Work Center to update a Soldier's record (i.e., APFT, weapons qualification, Mil/Civ education, awards, etc.), integrate a Soldier onto the promotion standing list, or failure to remove a Flag is not grounds for reconsideration under the ARC process."
 
	c.  Paragraph 5c states "The Soldier has the responsibility to ensure his/her record is current, all required updates are completed, and the information is accurate in their record and on the PPW.  The unit, S1, MPD, and/or promotion work center are responsible to ensure personnel records are undated both timely and accurately."

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his record should be corrected to show he was promoted to SGT with a DOR and effective date of 1 July 2013 instead of 
1 December 2013.

2.  The available evidence shows a 23 October 2012 DA Form 268 removed a flagging action effective 20 October 2012 with the annotation "Disciplinary action taken."

3.  The applicant's 2 May 2013 DA Form 3355 shows he was recommended for promotion to SGT with 421 promotion points.

4.  A 25 August 2013 DA Form 268 shows a Flag was removed effective 
20 October 2012, with the annotation "Case Closed favorably."

5.  Orders 13-32900059, Headquarters, 63rd Regional Support Command, dated 25 November 2013, announced he was promoted to SGT effective 1 December 2013.

6.  The applicant contends he was erroneously Flagged during the period 
20 October 2012 and 25 August 2013 and the erroneous Flag prevented his promotion effective 1 July 2013. 

7.  While there is no explanation provided as to why there are two DA Forms 268 apparently removing the same 20 October 2012 Flag, the applicant did not provide any evidence showing he met or exceeded the promotion cut-off score prior to his 1 December 2013 promotion or why his unit did not enter his promotion points in the system in a timely manner.

8.  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)                                         AR20120018623



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140000141



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1