IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 November 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150005294 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 correction of his military records by restoring his leave that was erroneously shown as having been used. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he was medically retired while on the promotion list to sergeant. His unit would not promote him due to the issues he had while deployed. His wife wrote his Congressman for help while he was deployed and his unit took it out on him. They were very unprofessional in the way they handled things. The unit had very toxic leadership. He has proof that he was charged for leave that he did not take. They would not give him his lost leave or pay him the difference. He talked to everyone on post seeking help. He even went to the medical board legal representative to get help. His unit still would not promote him. Furthermore, the applicant states that his unit did not promote him due to issues he had while deployed. 3. He has two DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the same period of active service, one showing his rank as specialist four and the other showing his rank as sergeant. When he cleared post they gave him the one showing his rank as sergeant. Then later it was changed to show specialist four and it was mailed to him. He just wants the rank he earned and the money for the leave he was not allowed to take. 4. The applicant provides copies of: * DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile), dated 25 July 2011 * Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) Form 702 (Military Leave and Earnings Statement) for the period 1-31 August 2011 * DA Forms 4856 (Developmental Counseling Form), dated 6 November 2012, 3 May 2013, and 19 September 2013 * DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated 26 December 2012 * Letter from the applicant’s wife to a Congressman dated 27 May 2013 * Pass/Leave Request, dated 20 June 2013 * DA Forms 3349, dated 16 July 2013, 20 August 2013, 12 September 2013, 24 October 2013, and 7 November 2013 * Letter from applicant’s unit to his Congressman, dated 19 July 2013 * Letter from applicant to his Congressman, dated 27 July 2013 and an undated letter * Letter from applicant’s wife to his/her Congressman, undated * DA Form 8003 (Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment), dated 19 September 2013 * Enlisted Record Brief (ERB), dated 29 October 2013 * DFAS Form 702, for 1-31 August 2013 * DA Form 4856, dated 12 November 2013 * Unit Enlisted Promotion Report, dated 3 June 2014 * DA Form 31 (Request and Authority for Leave), dated 10 June 2014 * Statement from applicant, dated 30 June 2014 * DD Form 214 (Member Copy 1), ending on 7 August 2014 * DD Form 214 (Member Copy 4), ending on 7 August 2014 * Statement from the applicant, dated 19 September 2014 * Memorandum from applicant’s former company commander, dated 17 June 2015 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. On 26 February 2008, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. 2. On 26 February 2010, the applicant was advanced to specialist, pay grade E-4. 3. A request for pass/leave dated 20 June 2013 indicates the applicant’s commander granted him a pass for the period 21-24 June 2013. The reason given for the pass was his wife’s birthday. 4. On 3 June 2014, a Unit Enlisted Promotion Report indicated the applicant had an Army physical fitness test date more than a year old. 5. A DA Form 31 dated 10 June 2014 indicates the applicant requested to take all of his accrued annual leave (51 days) from 18 June to 7 August 2014. This form indicates he departed on leave at 1812 hours, 18 June 2014. 6. In a statement dated 30 June 2014, the applicant said he filled out a leave form in July 2013 to take block leave of 24 days. He never took this leave but his unit charged him for it anyway. He asked to have the leave restored but it was not. 7. On 7 August 2014, the applicant was retired due to physical disability. He was issued a DD Form 214 showing he was separated in the rank of specialist, pay grade E-4. 8. In a memorandum dated 27 May 2015, the Chief, Department of the Army Promotions, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), stated the applicant’s records would be corrected to show he was promoted to staff sergeant (SSG), pay grade E-6, effective 7 August 2014. His military occupational specialty (MOS) was shown as 11B3P (Infantryman with parachutist qualification). 9. In a subsequent memorandum, dated 11 June 2015, HRC changed the content of the previous memorandum discussed above to show the applicant’s records would be corrected to show his rank as sergeant, pay grade E-5, and MOS 11B2P, still effective 7 August 2014. 10. Records show that a DD Form 214 has been issued reflecting the applicant’s rank, pay grade, and MOS as discussed in the previous paragraph. 11. In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Compensation and Entitlements Division, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1 (Personnel Officer), concerning the applicant’s record of annual leave usage. The opinion stated that a DFAS review of the applicant’s leave record found he was charged 24 days of leave for the period 21 June to 14 July 2013 as indicated on a DA Form 31. Also noted was an approved pass for the period 21 to 24 June 2013. A copy of the leave form was not provided. It is plausible to assume the applicant did not take block leave by the fact that his chain of command (Squad Leader, Platoon Sergeant, Platoon Leader, First Sergeant, and Company Commander) approved his 3-day pass during the block leave period. However, the burden of proof falls on the applicant in this case. The advisory opinion further stated that if the applicant can provide confirmation from someone in his leadership chain that he did not take the 24 days of block leave, then he should be reimbursed for the 24 days of leave. 12. On 8 June 2015, a copy of the advisory opinion was sent to the applicant for his information and opportunity to respond. 13. In a memorandum dated 17 June 2015, the applicant’s former company commander stated the applicant had deployed with his company to Afghanistan during the period September 2012 to May 2013. Prior to returning from deployment, Soldiers were instructed to submit their leave forms in anticipation of the upcoming post deployment block leave period. The commander recalls that 4 or 5 Soldiers declined to take advantage of the block leave period and opted instead to take a 4-day pass. The reasons varied from those who did not have enough leave accrued to those who were conscious of the low tempo of the garrison operations during post-deployment. The applicant was one of those Soldiers who remained in the Clarksville area. The commander stated he signed the pass form for the applicant and that it is safe to say he took the pass and not the block leave. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that his military records should be corrected by restoring his leave that was erroneously shown as having been used. He further mentioned that his unit would not promote him because of issues he had while deployed. 2. The available evidence shows that HRC has corrected his DD Form 214 to show he was retired in his promotable rank of sergeant, pay grade E-5. Accordingly, there is no further correction required for this issue. 3. The available evidence shows the applicant was charged with taking 24 days of annual leave from 21 June to 14 July 2013. His former commander, who was the leave approval authority at the time, states the applicant opted to take a 4-day pass and not the leave as indicated on a DA Form 31. 4. In view of the above and the recommendation in the G-1 advisory opinion, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records by restoring the 24 days of annual leave and reimbursing him accordingly. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ____X____ ____X____ ____X____ 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 partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. restoring 24 days of leave; and b. paying him any monies due as a result of this correction. 2. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to his issue of promotion to sergeant, pay grade E-5. ___________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) AR20130004321 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150005294 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1