IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 November 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150003859 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, promotion to staff sergeant (SSG)/pay grade E-6 and to be reinstated back on active duty. 2. The applicant states: a. He wants to be reinstated to active duty because he was unfairly separated after serving 15 years on active duty. b. The main reason for his discharge was that he did not make SSG/E-6. c. His main goal was to continue his military career and retire after 20 years just like his father. d. He was never sent to the promotion board so he could be promoted. e. He was authorized a 9-month extension in 2013. 3. The applicant provides: * DA Forms 2166-8 (Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report) * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * Enlisted Record Brief (ERB) * DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States) * DA Form 3286 (Statements for Enlistment) * DA Form 4789 (Statement of Entitlement to Selective Reenlistment Bonus) * DA Forms 3340-R (Request for Reenlistment or Extension in the Regular Army (RA)) * DA Form 1695 (Oath of Extension of Enlistment) * Orders 253-0110 dated 10 September 2014 * Honorable Discharge Certificate * Army Commendation Medal Certificates * Army Achievement Medal Certificates * Permanent Orders 157-2962 dated 5 June 2008 * DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant had prior RA service. Following a break in service, on 8 November 2006, he enlisted again in the RA. He held military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Infantryman). 2. The applicant provides a copy of his ERB that shows he received 14 total promotion points as of 9 September 2009. 3. He also provides copies of his DA Forms 2166-8 that show he was recommended for promotion to SSG/E-6, attended two service schools (DA Form 1059) and that he received multiple awards. Finally, the applicant states that his DA Form 1695 shows that he was allowed to extend 9 months past his control retention point. 4. His record is void of documentation showing he was selected for promotion to SSG/E-6. 5. His DD Form 214 shows that on 27 February 2015, the applicant was honorably discharged after his completion of required active service. He had 15 years and 11 days of total active duty service. 6. On 28 May 2015, an advisory opinion was received from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), Promotions Branch. After a review of his application, HRC determined that his request for correction of his military records should be disapproved. a. It has been determined that the applicant was separated from the Army due to reaching his retention control point of 14 years as a promotable sergeant (SGT)/E-5, in accordance with Military Personnel (MILPERS) Message 14-070. b. The records available to the Junior Enlisted Promotion Section indicate that he was command list integrated (CLI) on 23 April 2011, effective 1 January 2008, with 14 promotion points. He did not meet or exceed a Headquarters, Department of the Army cutoff score prior to his separation date of 27 February 2015. 7. On 7 June 2015, the applicant was provided a copy of the above advisory opinion and an opportunity to submit comments. He has not provided a response. 8. Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) prescribes policies and procedures governing promotion and reduction of Army enlisted personnel. Paragraph 3-1c states promotions to SGT and staff sergeant (SSG) are executed in a semi-centralized manner. a. Field operations will handle board appearance, promotion point calculation, promotion list maintenance, and the final execution of the promotions occur in the field in a decentralized manner. b. HQDA operations will handle promotion cutoff scores and the monthly SGT/SSG promotion selection by-name list, which are determined and announced monthly. c. HQDA and HRC will determine the needs of the Army by grade and MOS. d. A Soldier's total points are forwarded through the appropriate database, as determined by HRC, to the automated system. These points are consolidated into an Army-wide listing of eligible Soldiers by MOS maintained in the automated system. A determination is then made for each MOS as to what promotion point cutoff score would promote the desired number of Soldiers to meet the needs of the Army in a specific month. These decisions are based primarily upon budget constraints and individual MOS requirements. e. The importance of accuracy and timeliness in submission of data to the database cannot be overemphasized. Only visible scores will be considered. 9. MILPER Message Number 11-233, dated 28 July 2011, provided additional guidance for the semi-centralized promotion system, including: * discontinuation of exceptions to policy (ETP's) for promotions * introduction of the process and procedures for Administrative Records Corrections (ARC) a. Effective 1 June 2011, ETP's for promotion are no longer authorized. b. ARC was a new process aimed at achieving personnel/training data base accuracy used to establish SSG and SGT promotions effective 1 June 2011 and later. The promotion authority may submit a request for an ARC in cases that would previously require an ETP due to an unavoidable circumstance that is no fault of the Soldier, S-1, MPD, or promotions work center. The request must be fully justified, signed by the promotion authority, and submitted to HRC for approval. All supporting documentation specific to the request must be attached or the request will be returned without action. c. Failure on behalf of the Soldier, unit, S-1, MPD, or promotion work center to update a Soldier's record, integrate a Soldier into the promotion standing list, or failure to remove a flag is not grounds for reconsideration under the ARC process. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contention that he should have been promoted to SSG/E-6 was carefully considered. 2. The applicant’s promotion records show that he was on the CLI on 23 April 2011 effective 1 January 2008. His ERB, dated 9 September 2014 shows a total of 14 promotion points. 3. The HRC advisory opinion states that the applicant did not meet or exceed the cutoff score prior to his separation date of 27 February 2015. Therefore, he was separated due to his retention control point as a promotable SGT/E-5. There is no evidence of error. 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 that 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) AR20150000209 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150003859 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1