BOARD DATE: 30 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016101 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x____ ____x____ _____x___ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 30 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016101 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined 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. BOARD DATE: 30 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016101 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 her military records to show she was promoted to sergeant (SGT)/E-5. 2. The applicant states: a. Her original orders stated she would be promoted to SGT at the time of her discharge because she was promotable based on her time in service. While she was on maternity leave, her command terminated her promotable status due to no current Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). Clearly she wouldn't have an APFT due to her being pregnant and unable to take an APFT. She wouldn't be able to take an APFT for 6 months after the birth of her child. b. She started her medical evaluation board process in January immediately upon her return from maternity leave. She did not have a lapse in physical profile ratings. c. She should have been promoted as stated in her original orders and her promotable status should not have been terminated because she was issued a physical profile rating not allowing her to take the APFT. Her command sergeant major tried to get it corrected, but he did not have enough time. 3. The applicant provides no additional evidence. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 July 2006 for a period of 4 years. She was advanced to the rank/pay grade of specialist/E-4 effective 12 July 2008. On 23 October 2008, she was honorably discharged for immediate reenlistment. She reenlisted on 24 October 2008 for a period of 6 years. 2. On 1 January 2015, she was honorably discharged in the rank of specialist/ E-4 by reason of disability with severance pay, non-combat (enhanced). 3. There is no evidence of record showing she was recommended or selected for promotion to SGT/E-5. 4. In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Department of the Army Promotions, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Fort Knox, KY, dated 18 October 2016, wherein he states: a. The records available to the Junior Enlisted Promotion Section indicate the applicant was not in a promotable status prior to her separation from the Army. b. She is not entitled to a promotion in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), paragraph 1-20, promotion of Soldiers in the Disability Evaluation System. 5. A copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for information and to allow her the opportunity to submit comments or a rebuttal. She responded and stated she acknowledges the advisory opinion denied her request because she was not promotable at the time, but in her application she addressed why she was not in a promotable status. It was a mistake on her command's part because they took her promotable status away due to not having a current APFT. She was pregnant and could not take an APFT. She had orders in hand stating she was to be promoted upon discharge, but she was subsequently given new orders saying no. Her command sergeant major went with her to explain there was no error, but there was not enough time. She was told to petition the Board for an automatic promotion based on time in service. She was in the Army for 9 years. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 600-8-19, paragraph 1-20 (Promotion of Soldiers Pending Referral to a Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) Medical Retention Board, Medical Evaluation Board, or Physical Evaluation Board), states: a. Soldiers who are pending referral to an MOS Medical Retention Board under Army Regulation 600-60 (Physical Performance Evaluation System) or referral to a medical evaluation board under Army Regulation 40-400 (Patient Administration) or physical evaluation board under Army Regulation 635-40 (Disability Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) will not be denied promotion (if already promotable) on the basis of medical disqualification if they are otherwise qualified for promotion. b. Soldiers who have been conditionally promoted but are unable to meet the condition of their promotion solely because of a medical condition that results in a finding of unfitness by the Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) will not be subject to administrative reduction if otherwise qualified to retain promotable status. c. Per the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1372, Soldiers on a promotion list at the time of retirement for disability will be retired for disability at the promotion list grade. Further, the Soldier will be promoted to the designated grade effective the day before placement on the Retired List. d. Per the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1212, Soldiers who are on a promotion list at the time of separation for disability with entitlement to disability severance pay will be paid such compensation at the promotion list grade. Further, the Soldier will be promoted to the designated grade effective the Soldier's separation date. e. The guidance in paragraphs 1–20c and c also pertain to Active Army Soldiers who have reached the time-in-service requirements for the next level of automatic promotion (private two to specialist). f. Soldiers determined unfit by the Physical Disability Evaluation System but approved for continuation on active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 6, are otherwise eligible for promotion during the continuation on active duty period. 2. Army Regulation 600-8-19, chapter 3, provides the rules and steps for managing the semi-centralized promotion system to SGT and staff sergeant (SSG). It states: a. Promotions to SGT and SSG are executed in a semi-centralized manner. b. Field operations will handle board appearance, promotion point calculation, and promotion list maintenance. Final execution of the promotions occur in the field in a decentralized manner. c. Headquarters, Department of the Army, will handle promotion cutoff scores and the monthly SGT/SSG promotion selection by-name list, which are determined and announced monthly. d. Headquarters, Department of the Army, and the U.S. Army Human Resources Command will determine the needs of the Army by grade and MOS. e. A Soldier's total points are forwarded through the appropriate database, as determined by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, 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. f. The importance of accuracy and timeliness in submission of data to the database cannot be overemphasized. Only visible scores will be considered. g. By using the standard promotion scoring forms, with predetermined promotion point factors, Soldiers in pay grades specialist/corporal and SGT generally can measure how well they qualify for promotion. They can set precise goals with a self-improvement training program to increase their potential for promotion. h. The semi-centralized promotion system depends on the sequential execution of the key events listed in this chapter. Untimely action in the field leads to inaccurate promotion decisions. i. If the promotion authority is a general officer, he or she may delegate his or her promotion authority in writing to the deputy commander or the senior personnel manager. The person to whom the promotion authority is delegated must be a field grade officer, filling a lieutenant colonel or higher-coded position. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends her original orders stated she would be promoted to SGT/E-5 upon her discharge because she was in a promotable status based on her time in service. 2. There is no evidence showing she was recommended or selected for promotion to SGT/E-5 or that she was properly integrated into the promotion standing list prior to her discharge in 2015. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150016101 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150016101 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2