RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 May 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060012856 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests her date of rank for promotion to Sergeant Major (SGM) be changed to 1 December 1999. 2. The applicant states: a. She is a member of the US Army Reserve (USAR) and she entered on extended active duty (EAD) for 3 years on 25 January 1999. Later in 1999, she was advised by the Army Reserve Personnel Command (ARPERSCOM), St. Louis, MO that she had been selected for promotion to SGM. b. She made the appropriate inquiries concerning how her EAD status might affect her promotion to SGM and she was told it would have no effect. She was promoted to SGM on 1 December 1999. c. On 27 April 2000, her promotion was revoked. She states no one in ARPERSCOM could provide a satisfactory answer as to why her promotion was revoked. She requested "de facto" promotion to SGM and was denied. d. She was again promoted to SGM on 1 November 2003 – her current date of rank – and she was still on EAD. 3. The applicant provides: a. A 21 November 2006 memorandum from the US Army Human Resources Command (HRC) – St. Louis, MO (formerly ARPERSCOM). b. Orders A-12-004395, US Total Army Personnel Command, St. Louis, MO, dated 31 December 1998, ordering her to EAD under the authority of Army Regulation (AR) 612-205. c. Orders 354-5, US Total Army Personnel Command, St. Louis, dated 20 December 1999, promoting her to SGM effective 1 December 1999. d. Orders 118-2, US Total Army Personnel Command, St. Louis, dated 27 April 2000, revoking her promotion to SGM. e. DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) with associated documents, dated 9 August 2000, wherein she requests de facto status as a SGM. f. Orders A-12-004395A02, US Total Army Personnel Command, St. Louis, dated 7 January 2002, amending her EAD orders by extending her active service to 24 January 2005. g. Orders 289-24, US Army HRC – St. Louis, dated 16 October 2003, promoting her to SGM with a date of rank of 1 November 2003. h. Memorandum, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, Pentagon, Washington, DC, dated 15 November 1999, Subject: Enlisted Promotion/Noncommissioned Officer Education System (NCOES) Policy for Soldiers Called to Active Duty in Support of the Fort Benning CONUS Replacement Center. i. Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) Message 120000Z January 1998 with Subject: USAR Enlisted Promotion/Noncommissioned Officer Education System (NCOES) Policy Upon Activation in Support of Presidential Selected Reserve Call-up (PSRC) Operations. j. Orders A-11-412118, US Army HRC – Alexandria, VA, dated 24 November 2004, ordering her to EAD. k. Electronic mail (Email). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant is a USAR SGM serving an EAD tour. In 1999, she was ordered to EAD as a Master Sergeant (MSG) under the provisions of AR 612-205 (Appointment and Separation of Service Academy Attendees). While on EAD, she was selected for promotion to SGM by the CY1999 Reserve Component Selection Board. She was promoted on 1 December 1999. 2. On 27 April 2000, the US Total Army Personnel Command, St. Louis, issued orders revoking the applicant's promotion. The applicant attempted to obtain a de facto promotion without success. 3. Under regulations then in effect, the applicant, still on EAD, was considered for promotion by the CY2003 Individual Ready Reserve/Individual Mobilization Augmentee/Extended Active Duty (CY2003 IRR/IMA/EAD) Promotion Selection Board. She was selected and promoted to SGM effective 1 November 2003. 4. In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from HQDA, Deputy Chief of Staff, G1 which states the applicant's initial EAD orders cited the incorrect regulation; the orders should have cited AR 135-210 (Order to Active Duty as Individuals for Other Than a Presidential Selected Reserve Call-up, Partial or Full Mobilization). As a result, she should not have been considered for promotion by a Reserve promotion board under the provision of AR 140-158 (Enlisted Personnel Classification, Promotion, and Reduction), but by an active duty promotion board under the provisions of AR 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions). In 2003, the G1 granted an exception to policy to permit Reserve Soldiers on EAD to be considered for promotion under the provisions of AR 140-158. The first such promotion board was the CY2003 IRR/IMA/EAD board. The applicant was properly considered and selected by that board. In conclusion, the G1 advisory opinion stated the applicant's 1999 promotion was erroneous and was properly revoked. The opinion recommends disapproval of a date of rank adjustment. The applicant was provided an opportunity to respond to the advisory opinion, but did not do so. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant was erroneously considered for promotion by the CY1999 Reserve Promotion Board. Her resultant promotion was improper and was revoked. 2. The applicant was properly considered for promotion by the CY2003 IRR/IMA/EAD Promotion Board. Her 1 November 2003 date of rank for promotion to SGM is correct and requires no adjustment. 3. 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. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __wfc___ __dll___ __rsv___ 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. William F. Crain ______________________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20060012856 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20070531 TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION DENY REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 100.0200 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.