IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 7 January 2015
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140016837
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 he be promoted to the pay grade of E-6 effective 1 April 2014 with entitlement to all back pay and allowances.
2. The applicant states, in effect, he appeared before the promotion selection board in January 2014 and was informed by his first sergeant that awards were removed from his promotion points worksheet because orders were not on file in his official records to support the entries. As a result, he was not promoted to the pay grade of E-6 in April and May 2014 when the Department of the Army (DA) cut-off scores dropped to 555 and 549 respectively. He would have had 556 points had his records not been unjustly altered. The awards were unjustly removed from his records and that correct procedures were not followed in their removal as an investigation should have been conducted. Additionally, he is overdue for a Good Conduct Medal.
3. The applicant provides a three-page letter explaining his application, copies of his Enlisted Record Briefs (ERB) before and after removal of the awards, copies of his promotion points worksheets (PPW) before and after removal of the awards, DA cut-off scores for April and May 2014, two pages of instructions for completing the PPW, a copy of Military Personnel (MILPER) Message Number 14-046, five pages of Army Regulation 600-8-22, and copies of his reassignment orders.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 January 2003 for a period of 6 years and training as a heath care specialist.
2. On 30 October 2008, while deployed to Iraq, he reenlisted for a period of 5 years and assignment to Fort Eustis, Virginia. He again reenlisted on
24 January 2014 for a period of 4 years.
3. The PPW submitted by the applicant with his application showing a points effective date of 23 April 2013 reflects 11 awards; however, it also reflects that he was ineligible due to a flagging action (Suspension of a Favorable Personnel Action). It also shows total points of 476.
4. The PPW submitted by the applicant with his application showing a points effective date of 29 January 2014 reflects 5 awards and total points of 446.
5. A review of his official records failed to show orders for the awards that were removed from his PPW. Additionally, the applicant has not provided orders for the awards in question nor has he provided any evidence to show that he has taken steps to have his records updated by providing orders for the awards in question.
6. The two pages provided by the applicant regarding the steps to prepare a PPW clearly show in step 24 that the individual Soldier is required to review the ERB to ensure entries are accurate and that supporting documents are filed in official records.
7. In the processing of this case a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) which opines that the applicant did not meet the DA announced cut-off score for his military occupational specialty and recommends that his request be denied.
8. The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant who responded with a two-page response to the effect that the points were unjustly removed from his PPW and that the HRC has not considered how the system has been manipulated or an explanation provided as to why his records have been altered.
9. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Army Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency, and fidelity. This period is 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of active Federal military service. Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. While the sincerity of the applicants claim that the awards in question were unjustly removed from his official records that resulted in the removal of those points from his PPW is not in question, the applicant has failed to show sufficient evidence to support his claim.
2. The applicant has not provided any evidence in the form of orders to show that he was authorized the awards in question nor has he provided any evidence to show that he has taken the necessary steps to update his official records or to establish that he is authorized the awards in question.
3. The applicant also has not shown that he has utilized his chain of command in regard to his award of the Army Good Conduct Medal or that he has attempted to resolve his issues through his chain of command.
4. Therefore, in the absence of such evidence, there appears to be no basis to grant the applicants request.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ 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.
_______ _ _______ ___
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) AR20140016837
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140016837
4
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150007177
The applicant states, in effect, he is providing a new argument and evidence that were not previously considered. He had previously stated he was not promoted to SSG in April or May 2014 when the promotion cut-off scores dropped to 555 and 549 respectively, and he would have had 556 promotion points had his records not been unjustly altered. Regrettably, in the absence of orders showing that he should have been awarded promotion points for additional awards and he did met the promotion...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150000209
The applicant requests, in effect, promotion to sergeant (SGT)/pay grade E-5 effective 1 August 2013 and all back pay due as a result. The applicant provides: * four promotion point worksheets (PPW) Unofficial Copy * an HRC memorandum, subject: Department of the Army Promotion Point Cutoff Scores for 1 August 2013 and Junior Enlisted Issues for the Active Army (AA) * a memorandum, subject: Request an Administrative Records Correction (ARC) for [Applicant], issued by Headquarters, 532nd...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012279
He provided a memorandum from the 191st CSSB, dated 27 December 2012, subject: Promotion Board Proceedings for Promotion to SGT and SSG, recommending the applicant for promotion to SGT. HRC memorandum for U.S. Army Promotion Work Centers, dated 22 February 2013, subject: Department of the Army Promotion Point Cutoff Scores for 1 March 2013 and Junior Enlisted Issues, announcing promotion point cutoff scores for 1 March 2013. a. He provided a copy of his email to HRC, dated 3 June 2013,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120014904
The applicant requests: * correction of his Enlisted Record Brief (ERB) to reflect the correct date and number of promotion points to sergeant (SGT)/E-5 * retroactive promotion to SGT/E-5 with a date of rank (DOR) and effective date of 1 June 2011 2. However, as of 1 May 2011, the applicant was recorded as having 562 promotion points. Therefore, he cannot be promoted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011270
The applicant states, in effect: * he is a wounded warrior, serving at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (WRNMMC) * he appeared before the SSG promotion board on 2 August 2012 and was recommended for promotion by the board with a total of 365 points * his points were inaccurately calculated, as the promotions clerk erroneously omitted 19 months of deployment service, equaling 38 points, and an additional 54 points from across other categories * after the August 2012 SSG promotion...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005721
He states: a. he turned in his promotion documents on 7 April 2011 assuming he had until the normal monthly deadline of 8 April 2011. b. he was not informed by S-1 that he had to have his record updated by 5 April 2011 for validation for the 1 May 2011 promotion board. b. the timeline for the DA Form 3355 (Promotion Point Worksheet) shutdown on 6 April 2011 was announced via MILPER (Military Personnel) Message 11-084, S-1 Net, and the Army Times. He contends he was not informed by the S-1...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000141
The applicant states, in effect, he went before a promotion board for SGT on 2 May 2013. 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." While...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100015805
He states: * he wasnt promoted in a timely manner due to administrative errors * he made cut-off promotion points score of 350 on 8 August 1999, 1 October 2007, and 1 January 2009 in MOS 92Y (Unit Supply Specialist) * his Enlisted Record Brief (ERB) shows his promotion points was 350 on 8 August 1999 * Installation Management Command (IMCOM) reviewed his records and didnt see any flags, adverse actions or a promotion bar 3. His service record does not indicate he was recommended for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711760
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant’s military records show that he received a promotion points reevaluation in July 1996 which changed his promotion points from 639 to 635 promotion points. Consequently, the applicant was denied promotion to the pay grade of E-6 on 1 December 1996.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002288
The applicant requests correction of his military records to show he was promoted to staff sergeant (SSG) with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 June 2011. The message states, in part, Brigade/Battalion S-1 and Unit HR Specialists will assist Soldiers with updating their personnel records through the electronic Military Personnel Office (eMILPO) system and update training records through the S3/G3 Army Training Requirements and Resources System (ATTRS) Representative. His request did not warrant a...