MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            27 May 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1998013502

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Edward Williamson		Chairperson	
	Ms. Meta Waller		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Promotion to the pay grade of E-6 and reinstatement to active duty with all back pay and allowances.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was unjustly denied promotion to the pay grade of E-6 on 1 February 1993 when his college transcripts were lost and promotion points were taken away from him.  Consequently, he was not promoted and was forced to separate from the service due to having reached the retention control point (RCP) for his grade.  He goes on to state that he had at least 889 points for promotion at one point and that when he departed Fort Polk, Louisiana in November 1992 for assignment to Germany, he was informed that all of his documents were present in his records.  However, when he arrived in Germany his college transcripts were not present in his records and promotion points were deducted.  He also states that while deployed to Saudi Arabia from December 1990 to April 1991 some of his files were also misplaced.  He continues by stating that by the time he got replacement transcripts in order to get the points restored, he had already missed the 1 February 1993 cut-off score (899) that would have allowed him to be promoted.  He continues by stating that he made several attempts to get the error corrected; however, because the transcript was not back-dated, the scores could not be made retroactive.  Therefore, he should be promoted and restored to active duty because the error was made through no fault of his own and he should be given all back pay and allowances he would have received had the injustice not occurred.  In support of his application he submits an unofficial copy of his transcripts, copies of letters he sent explaining his dilemma, and an altered copy of a promotion recomputation dated 26 October 1994.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 November 1980 for a period of 3 years.  He remained on active duty as a medical specialist through a series of continuous reenlistments and was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 September 1982.

On 29 April 1995 he was honorably discharged in the pay grade of E-5 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8, due to reduction in force.  He had served 15 years and 18 days of total active service and received $29,548.80 in separation pay.

A review of the applicant’s records failed to reveal any promotion points worksheets for the period he served on active duty.  However, the documents submitted by the applicant show that he had 781 promotion points in October 1991 and 882 promotion points in October 1992.  The altered promotion points recomputation sheet provided by the applicant shows that when given 75 points for civilian education, the applicant only had 669 points for promotion on 26 October 1994.
Army Regulation 600-200, in effect at the time, provided the policies and procedures for promotion to the pay grade of E-6.  It states, in pertinent part, that soldiers who change duty stations must take their promotion packets with their Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) to their gaining command for integration on the new command’s promotion standing list.  The promotion packet must contain the original promotion points worksheet (DA Form 3355) which recommended them for promotion and as many as the two most recent DA Form 3355’s.  Additionally, a copy of the recommended list for promotion and a DA Form 2A reflecting the most current points must be included with the packet.  Documents that are not filed in the MPRJ must also accompany the packet to support the points awarded.  The regulation also provides that recomputation of promotion points will occur yearly; which requires the commander to submit updated information such as current physical fitness scores(valid for 1 year only), weapons qualifications, skill qualification tests (SQT), and commander’s evaluation.  However, soldiers who increase their points by 35 points or more may request a reevaluation of their points at any time.  When recomputations or reevaluations occur, points will not become effective until 3 months after the action is completed.  Adjustments to add administrative points that were effective prior to the date the DA Form 3355 was initiated but were not supported with official documentation will not result in retroactive promotions.

That regulation also provides that promotion point adjustments are authorized to correct an error or to add additional administrative points that were properly documented but were not added at the time the DA Form 3355 was prepared.  In cases where the points meet or exceed the announced cut-off score, the soldier will be promoted.

Army Regulation 601-280 provides the policies reenlistment and retention in the Regular Army.  It provides, in effect, that effective 1 October 1993, the maximum service allowed (RCP) for personnel serving as promotable E-5’s is 15 years of active Federal service. 

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The Board is unable, without the benefit of having the original promotion points worksheets, to determine the validity of the applicant’s claim.  Notwithstanding his contention that he did not receive the proper credit for his civilian education, promotion points vary from year to year depending on a variety of factors such as physical fitness scores, weapons qualification, skill qualification testing, and commander’s evaluation.  Therefore, the Board is unable to determine that an error or injustice exists in his case.

3.  The Board also notes that had an error existed in his case, that there were sufficiently current records in effect that he could have proven his contentions that points had been unjustly or erroneously removed and that if he provided the documents to prove his case, he could have been promoted.

4.  Therefore, in the absence of the documents necessary to substantiate the applicant’s claims, the Board must presume that the actions taken in his case were in accordance with applicable regulations in effect at the time.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__klw ___  __elw ___  __mw___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1998013502	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999/05/27	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  310 	131.0000/PROMOTION	
2.  192 	110.0300/REINSTATE	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.