MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

		IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE:           16 December 2003   
		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003087534

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy L. Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Ms. Shirley Powell		Member	
	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		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:  That he be reinstated in the Army National Guard (ARNG) and promoted to Master Sergeant (MSG), E-8.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was on the promotion list in both 1998 and 1999 and in both instances he was not promoted.  Each time the soldier below him on the list was promoted.  He was never removed from the list in accordance with National Guard Regulation 600-200.  He was fully eligible and had no adverse flagging actions.  He was forced to retired with 24 years of service due to his grade.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records are not available.  Information contained herein was obtained from evidence provided by the applicant:  Delaware ARNG (DEARNG) MSG Promotion List dated 4 August 1998; DEARNG MSG Promotion List dated 6 August 1999; the applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record Part II); a DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report); four DA Forms 705 (Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard); a memorandum dated 16 November 1999 awarding the applicant the Army National Guard Senior Recruiter Badge; and an extract from chapter 11, National Guard Regulation 600-200.

After having had prior service (with an initial entry date of on or about 8 May 1978), the applicant enlisted in the DEARNG on or about 30 April 1982.  He was promoted to Sergeant First Class (SFC), E-7 on 7 February 1991.  He was awarded primary military occupational specialty (MOS) 79T (Recruiting/Retention Noncommissioned Officer) on or about 12 January 1998.  He completed the ARNG 79T Basic Course on 20 February 1998.  

The DEARNG MSG promotion list dated 4 August 1998 shows that eight SFCs were on the MSG promotion list in career progression MOS 79T.  The applicant was third on the list.  Two SFCs with a primary MOS of 79T4H (instructor-qualified) had more points than he did.  SFC Da___ was fourth on the list, followed by SFC P___, SFC W___, SFC Do___, and SFC J___.

The DEARNG MSG promotion list dated 6 August 1999 shows that seven SFCs were on the MSG promotion list in career progression MOS 79T.  The applicant was again third on the list with the same two SFCs ahead of him.  SFC Da___ and SFC J___ were no longer on the list.  The applicant was followed on this list by SFC S___ (a new name), SFC W___, SFC P___, and SFC Do___.

The applicant was apparently discharged from the ARNG and transferred to the Retired Reserve around 30 September 2002.

National Guard Regulation 600-200 establishes policies and procedures for the management of ARNG enlisted soldiers in several functional areas including promotion.  It states that to be eligible for promotion a soldier must:  (1) be in a promotable status; (2) be participating satisfactorily in the active ARNG in the next lower grade; (3) have completed the time in grade and time in service criteria; (4) have a high school diploma or equivalent or higher civilian educational level and successfully complete the required military education; and (5) be qualified in the career progression MOS for the position into which assigned and promoted.  It also states that some positions on manning documents identify additional skills.  Unless a soldier cannot perform the duties of the position due to a lack of special qualifications identifier or additional skill identifier, such as in certain airborne or special forces positions, this training is not a criterion in determining MOS qualification for promotion.

National Guard Regulation 600-200 further states that the promotion selection process establishes the means to consider all eligible soldiers and select the best qualified soldiers for promotion.  States will conduct one board and publish a promotion list for each rank approximately once each year.  The selection objective will list in promotion sequence the best-qualified soldiers who will be assigned to current and projected vacancies in higher graded positions.  The promotion list is neither a permanent standing list nor an order of merit list.  Each list published by the State Adjutant General is a new list and is intended to remain valid until exhausted, or a subsequent list supersedes it approximately one year later.  If not assigned and promoted from the old list before it expires, the soldiers sequence on the new list will be determined solely by their ranking with their contemporaries; they will not be placed at the top of the list.  If soldiers are eligible and available for the assignment, they will be assigned and promoted provided they have met all other requirements for the promotion.

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 this requirement.

2.  It is noted that the SFC Da___, who ranked just below the applicant on the 1998 MSG promotion list, did not appear on the 1999 MSG promotion list; however, there is no evidence to show that SFC Da___ was promoted into a position that the applicant otherwise qualified for, thereby depriving the applicant of an opportunity for promotion.  It is also noted that two SFCs who ranked higher than the applicant in career progression MSO 79T on the 1998 MSG promotion list were also still listed on the 1999 MSG promotion list.

3.  The applicant does not explain why he believes he should have been removed from the promotion list.  
4.  With the limited records available, the applicant's exact status while he was in the ARNG cannot be determined.  It cannot be determined why he was separated (presumably transferred to the Retired Reserve) or whether or not he was "forced" to retire with 24 years of service due to his grade contrary to any policy.

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

__jns___  __sp____  __sac___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087534	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20031216	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Mr. Chun	
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.	110.03	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.