IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 May 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140006360 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 promotion to master sergeant (MSG), E-8. 2. The applicant states – * between 2009 and 2012, her name was one of the top three names on the Oklahoma Army National Guard (OKARNG) Promotion List but there were no promotion slots available during that time * she left her Active Guard Reserve (AGR) position to accept Active Duty Operational Support (ADOS) orders on 3 February 2012 which placed her back in a traditional (troop program unit) status * when it appeared that there would not be any forthcoming promotion, she elected to apply for sanctuary status to complete her period of service for retirement purposes * if she had been properly promoted she would have agreed to the additional service requirements to accept that promotion 3. The applicant provides copies of – * pages 10 -11 of Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) * 2 February 2012 active duty orders * a 2012 OKARNG promotion list * 10 pages of email correspondence CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant, an OKARNG sergeant first class (SFC) had over 15 years of prior active service and inactive service in an AGR position from 4 December 2005 through 2 February 2012. 2. She was released from her AGR position to accept an ADOS assignment from 3 February through 30 September 2012. 3. The applicant applied for and received sanctuary status under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code §12686. She was issued sanctuary orders for the period 1 October 2012 through 28 February 2014. The applicant was honorably retired due to the expiration of her sanctuary orders/service. 4. Block 12c (Net Active Service This Period) of the DD Form 214 issued to her on 28 February 2014 shows her net service this period equals 7 months and 28 days. 5. In the development of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the National Guard Bureau, Chief, Personnel Policy Division. It states that – * on 3 February 2012 she reverted to a traditional status with her release from the AGR * the applicant remained eligible for promotion during the period 3 February through 30 September 2012 * the OKARNG retained promotion authority during this period * the applicant applied for and was approved for sanctuary for the period 1 October 2012 through 28 February 2014 * she was not eligible for promotion during the sanctuary period * on 29 June 2012, the OKARNG bypassed the applicant and, without regulatory authority, promoted another Soldier ranked lower on the promotion list * the applicant's records should be corrected by promoting her to MSG/E-8 effective 29 June 2012 with retroactive entitlement to all pay and allowances associated with the promotion * the OKARNG concurred with this recommendation 6. A copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant. The available record does not indicate the applicant submitted any additional statements or contentions. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The available evidence shows the applicant was on the State promotion list and in a promotable status on 29 June 2012 when another Soldier that ranked below the applicant on the promotion list was promoted to MSG/E–8. This action was improper and contrary to regulation and policy and denied the applicant her just promotion. 2. As a matter of equity and to correct the injustice, it would be appropriate to show the applicant was promoted to MSG/E–8, effective 29 June 2012, with retroactive entitlement to all pay and allowances associated with the promotion to the date of her retirement. 3. There was an arithmetic error on the 28 February 2014 DD Form 214, at block 12c (Net Active Service This Period). The applicant's period of service is incorrectly entered as 7 months and 28 days not the correct figure of 1 year, 4 months, and 28 days. This administrative error does not require action by the Board. Therefore, administrative correction of the applicant's records will be accomplished by the Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) Case Management Division (CMD) as outlined in paragraph 2 of the BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below. BOARD VOTE: ____X___ ____X___ ____X___ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing the applicant was promoted to MSG/E-8, effective 29 June 2012, with retroactive entitlement to all pay and allowances associated with the promotion. 2. The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the individual should be corrected. Therefore, the Board requests that the ARBA CMD administratively correct the records of the individual concerned to show the applicant's last period of active duty service as 1 year, 4 months, and 28 days. _______ _ 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) AR20140006360 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140006360 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1