IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  30 April 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140015492 


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, in effect, correction of her military record to show she was promoted to the rank of sergeant (SGT)/pay grade E-5.

2.  The applicant states:

* she joined the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 23 November 1974 and should have been automatically promoted in rank after a period of 6 to 12 months
* at the end of her 20 years of service, she was told that her company commander wouldn't allow her to retire because she did not pass her Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT)
* when the commander was a lieutenant in the 827th Supply Company's detachment in Tulsa, OK, he regularly let everyone pass their APFT
* while assigned to the 827th Supply Company's detachment in Muskogee, OK, she was required to retake her APFT upon failure
* she deserves everything she worked for throughout her career
* she received $15,000.00 from the Department of Veterans Affairs in 2012

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence.

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 Reserve Component of the Women's Army Corps on 23 November 1974 in the rank/grade private first class (PFC)/E-3.

3.  Effective 7 May 1976, she was promoted from PFC to specialist four (SP4)/
E-4.

4.  DA Forms 705 (Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard) in the applicant's military service records show the following APFT dates and failing scores:

* 15 October 1989 – total points 129
* 9 May 1990 – total points 74
* 9 September 1990 – total points 0
* 3 October 1990 – total points 0
* 6 February 1992 – total points 12
* 2 May 1992 – total points 43
* 6 March 1993 – total points 12
* 6 February 1994 – total points 120
* 15 May 1994 – total points 81
* 7 May 1995 – total points 29
* 9 September 1995 – total points 109

5.  An Individual Training Plan Checklist, dated 2 June 1990, signed by the applicant and her unit commander, states in the remarks section:  "EM [Enlisted member] can't be promoted for at least one (1) yr [year].  Has 4 U [unexcused absences] as of 17 & 18 Sept. 89 [September 1989].  Has not passed APRT [Army Physical Readiness Test] as of 15 Oct. 89 [October 1989].  Did not pass last PLDC [Primary Leadership Development Course] Course.

6.  Her records also contain the following documents summarized below:

	a.  A DA Form 4856 (General Counseling Form), dated 2 February 1992, states she was administered the APFT on 2 February 1992 received a failing score in all events; a make-up APFT would be conducted in May 1992.  She was counseled that discharge procedures would be initiated if she failed the make-up APFT.

	b.  A DA Form 268 (Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (Flag)), dated 2 February 1992, shows a flagging action was initiated for APFT failure effective 2 February 1992.

	c.  A DA Form 4856, dated 2 May 1992, shows she failed the APFT (all events) a second time on that date.  The summary of counseling states, "This is your second failure of a record APFT.  Your separation orders will be prepared and forwarded to the 316th Quartermaster battalion for their handling and processing.  Your records will remain flagged until further notice."

	d.  A DA Form 4856, dated 4 October 1992, states, "Soldier has failed the APFT on 03 OCT 92 [3 October 1992].  This is recorded as the second consecutive PT [physical training – should read APFT] failure.  According to 122D ARCOM [122nd U.S. Army Reserve Command] Policy, this Soldier is being counseled and will be given a bar to reenlistment."

	e.  A DA Form 4126-R (Bar To Reenlistment Certificate), dated 1 May 1993, was initiated against her due to her second APFT failure.  She acknowledged she was counseled and advised of the basis for the action and indicated she did not desire to submit a statement in her own behalf.

	f.  A DA Form 4856, dated 15 May 1994, states, "The Soldier has failed the APFT on 940515 [15 May 1994].  Our records indicate that this is the first failure and that the Soldier will be scheduled for another PT test, not to be given prior to 90 days.  The Soldier's 201 file [Military Personnel Records Jacket] will be flagged for unfavorable action.  The Soldier will not be eligible for promotion, schools, etc.  The Soldier will be scheduled for make-up APFT test after 90 days."

	g.  A DA Form 268, dated 17 June 1994, shows a flagging action was initiated against her for APFT failure effective 6 February 1994.

	h.  A 122nd ARCOM Form (Retention Interviews) shows a record of several interviews held with the retention noncommissioned officer over a nearly 2-year period.

	a.  The remarks from 9 January 1993 stated she had over 18 years in the unit.  She wanted to retire but had trouble with the APFT.  The retention noncommissioned officer suggested following up with a medical evaluation.

	b.  The remarks from 4 December 1993 stated she was extended for 3 years on 10 July 1993 in order to be eligible to retire with 20 years of service.  She was currently ineligible to reenlist.

	c.  The remarks from 6 November 1994 stated she was extended under rule K (Army Regulation 140-111 (U.S. Army Reserve Reenlistment Program)).  She could not pass the APFT and never had.  She was very close to completing 20 years of service.

7.  On 23 June 1995, the applicant was notified by memorandum of her eligibility for retired pay at age 60 (20-year letter).

8.  On 8 February 1997, she was released from the 827th Quartermaster Company and assigned to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Retired).  She was placed on the Retired List in the rank/grade of SPC/E-4 effective 1 December 2009 upon reaching age 60.

9.  Army Regulation 140-158 (Army Reserve – Enlisted Personnel Classification, Promotion, and Reduction), in effect at the time, provided policy and procedures for promotion of enlisted USAR Soldiers.  Chapter 3 addressed promotion of Soldiers assigned to troop program units (TPU).

	a.  Paragraph 3-8 prescribed policies and procedures for advancement to SPC and allowed for normal advancement to SPC of a promotable Soldier who met the following requirements:

		(1)  completed 6 months of time in grade as a PFC;

		(2)  completed 24 months of time in service;

		(3)  was awarded a primary military occupational specialty (PMOS);

		(4)  met the retention medical fitness standards per Army Regulation 
40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness);

		(5)  completed eighth grade, general education diploma (GED) equivalent, or higher education; and

   	(6)  was issued a security clearance or interim security clearance if the Soldier's MOS required a clearance

	b.  Paragraph 3-9 prescribed policies and procedures for promotion to SGT and dictated the requirements for promotion selection board action for all promotions to SGT in order to standardize promotion qualification throughout the USAR and to ensure promotion of the best qualified Soldiers.  A SPC could be recommended for selection board consideration without regard to position vacancies, provided the basic eligibility requirements were met.  Promotion itself would be based solely on order of sequence by MOS on the recommended list, an appropriate modified table of organization and equipment or table of distribution and allowances vacant position, and promotable status.

	c.  Paragraph 3-11 prescribed the eligibility for selection board consideration for those Soldiers referenced in paragraph 3-9.  Soldiers recommended for promotion to SGT must have met the following requirements in order to be subsequently selected for promotion:

		(1)  be a member of the USAR and assigned to a TPU;

		(2)  be in a promotable status; a Soldier with a flag in effect could not be promoted until the suspension of favorable personnel action was lifted;

		(3)  be a high school diploma graduate or GED equivalent;

		(4)  compete for promotion and be promoted in his or her primary, secondary, or additional MOS and be fully qualified in the MOS for which he or she was selected for promotion;

		(5)  meet the retention medical fitness standards per Army Regulation 
40-501;

		(6)  be in the grade next below that to which being promoted;

		(7)  local position vacancies were not required for promotion board considered and selection; only promotion off the recommended list requires the existence of a position vacancy;

		(8)  a passing APFT score was mandatory for promotion consideration;

		(9)  must have the appropriate security clearance required by the MOS in which being promoted;

		(10)  a minimum marksmanship qualification rating of Marksman was mandatory unless serving in a unit exempt from qualification by Headquarters, U.S. Army Forces Command;

		(11)  except as otherwise provided in this regulation, must be a graduate of the Noncommissioned Officer Education System course or the equivalency required for the next higher grade;

		(12)  must meet time in grade requirements for promotion to SGT, 12 months as CPL or SPC may be waived to 6 months; and

		(13)  must meet time in service requirements for promotion to SGT, 36 months in the primary zone or 18 months in the secondary zone.

10  Field Manual 21-20 (Physical Fitness Training), in effect at the time, prescribed doctrine for execution of the Army Physical Readiness Training System, to include the APFT.  Chapter 14 pertained to the APFT.  It stated the Soldier's fitness performance for each APFT event was determined by converting the raw score for each event to a point score.  The maximum point score on the APFT is 300, 100 points per event.  The standard for passing the APFT was a minimum of 60 points per event and no less than 180 points overall.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request for correction of her records to show she was promoted to the rank of SGT/pay grade E-5 was carefully considered but found to lack merit.

2.  There is no indication she was ever recommended for promotion to SGT or ever met the prerequisites for promotion.  Regulatory guidance does not allow for automatic promotion from SPC to SGT after a specified time in service as the applicant was led to believe.

3.  Certain prerequisites must be met to be recommended for promotion and to subsequently be selected for promotion.  In order to be eligible for promotion to SGT, a Soldier must have a passing APFT score among other requirements and any previously-initiated flag must have been lifted from his or her record.

4.  Records indicate she failed the APFT on at least 11 successive occasions between 1989 and 1995 for which she received appropriate counseling, a personnel action flag against her records, and a bar to reenlistment.

5.  In view of the foregoing evidence, there is no basis for granting the 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 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)                                         AR20140015492



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140015492



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1