RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 2 October 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070006678 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. Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano Director Mr. Mohammed R. Elhaj Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Ms. Ann M. Campbell Chairperson Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas Member Mr. Jeffrey C. Redmann Member 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 reconsideration of his earlier request to be promoted to sergeant (SGT)/pay grade E-5. 2. The applicant states that he was verbally promised a promotion by his commander prior to being discharged. He further adds that while on active duty in support of Operation Noble Eagle during the period 1 October 2001 through 26 January 2002, he was awarded a General Officer's coin on two occasions. He concludes that he worked as Charge of Quarters (CQ) at Fort Hamilton, New York, and that he completed two years of college through correspondence courses. 3. The applicant provided a self-authored letter, dated 2 July 2002; a photograph of his coins; and a copy of his National Guard Bureau NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) in support of his application. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20050013469, on 25 April 2006. 2. The applicant submitted a self-authored letter and a photograph of his coins, both of which were not previously reviewed by the ABCMR; therefore, they are considered new evidence and as such warrant consideration by the Board. 3. The applicant's records show that he enlisted in the U.S. Navy on 31 July 1964 and was released on 3 November 1967 in pay grade E-4 and transferred to the U.S. Naval Reserve. After a break in service, he enlisted in the New York Army National Guard (NYARNG) on 14 September 1984, in pay grade E-4. 4. Item 18 (Appointments and Reductions) of his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows his date of rank to specialist four (or specialist) as 14 September 1984. 5. Office of The Adjutant General, State of New York, Orders Number 006-046, dated 6 January 2003, show that the applicant was discharged from the NYARNG on 10 November 2002 in the rank of specialist (SPC) and reassigned to the Retired Reserve on the following day. 6. The applicant's NGB Form 22 shows he was discharged in the rank SPC/pay grade E-4. His date of rank to SPC/pay grade E-4 is shown as 14 September 1984. 7. There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant's unit commander recommended him for promotion to SGT. There is no evidence in the applicant's records that he was promised a promotion. 8. In his self-authored letter, the applicant stated that he was retiring due to illness and that he wished to be promoted with a waiver. He argues that there must be a system in place where an "older Soldier can be promoted on the basis of merit versus slot." The applicant concludes by listing his awards and decorations. 9. The applicant provided a photograph showing the two coins he received from the Commander, 42nd Division as well as a locally produced World Trade Center coin. 10. National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200, in effect at the time, sets forth the basic authority for the personnel management of enlisted personnel of the ARNG. Chapter 6, in pertinent part, of the several versions in effect during the applicant's 18-year assignment with the ARNG set forth the eligibility and criteria for promotion to pay grades E-3 to E-9. It states that in order to be eligible for promotion, an individual must be in the active ARNG; be assigned to a Federally recognized unit vacancy as authorized by table of organization and equipment (TOE), modified table of organization and equipment (MTOE), table of distributions and allowances (TDA), or modified table of distributions and allowances (MTDA); be recommended by the unit commander; be selected by a board as best qualified; and/or be in a promotable status. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that his earlier request to be promoted to sergeant (SGT)/pay grade E-5 should be reconsidered. 2. There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant served in a unit vacancy in the rank of SGT, or that he was selected by a board as best qualified, or that his unit commander ever recommended him for promotion to SGT. Therefore, in the absence of evidence, the applicant is not entitled to his requested relief. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __amc___ __lmd___ __jcr___ 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20050013469, dated 25 April 2006. Ann M. Campbell ______________________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070006678 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20071002 TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION (DENY) REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 131.0000 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.