IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 June 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016610 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 IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 June 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016610 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. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 June 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016610 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 reconsideration of his previous requests for correction of his records to show he was promoted to the rank/pay grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 effective 1 April 2014, with entitlement to all back pay and allowances. 2. The applicant states: a. He requests a correction to his records to show all earned awards and decorations and then retroactive promotion to SSG/E-6. The previous two Boards did not clearly address his request to correct his Enlisted Record Brief (ERB) and Promotion Point Worksheet, then promote him. b. The S-1 illegally removed awards and badges that he had earned from his records prior to review by the January 2014 promotion board. By this action, he subsequently did not have enough points for the cut-off score for promotion to SSG in the months of April or May of 2014. c. Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-22 (Military Awards), section 1-32, paragraph c, states "The authority to wear an award may be suspended by the award approval authority or higher authority. An award will be suspended when an investigation has been initiated by proper authority to determine the validity of the award. The authority directing the suspension will notify, in writing, the individual concerned and the Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC)…by the most expeditious means possible when suspension is initiated, when it is terminated, and the reason(s) for termination." d. AR 600-8-22, section 1-33, paragraph a, states "Commanders authorized to award combat and special skill badges are authorized to revoke such awards. An award once revoked will not be reinstated except by HRC…when fully justified. When desirable, the award authority may refer the revocation request to HRC…for appropriate action." He is unaware of any investigation that took place in regards to the removal of any of his awards from his records to include the Combat Medical Badge. e. Military Personnel (MILPER) Message 14-046, dated 19 February 2014, states all components will implement interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) personnel and finance record reviews using the Record Review Tool (RRT). According to the RRT, as it pertains to awards, record managers will ?list any permanently missing documents that cannot be located in the 'reviewer comments' section.? A review of his records will support that a record review was not done and no one made any comments regarding any missing documentation other than himself. There is no section in the RRT that authorizes the S-1 to remove any awards or badges from anyone's records. f. The Board's denial states he did not provide any conclusive evidence showing he had awards that were unjustly removed from his official military personnel file (OMPF). He never stated that his OMPF had been altered or tampered with. The issue lies with the illegal altering of his ERB and its impact on altering his Promotion Point Worksheet. His reconsideration request was based on inaccurate or misunderstood information. He asks that the two previous decisions be rescinded and that his current request be approved. 3. The applicant provides copies of: * Permanent Orders (PO) Number 041-013, 252-01, 252-03, and 252-04 * MILPER Messages Number 10-222, 11-033, 11-084, and 13-055 * two ERBs dated 4 November 2013 and 2 October 2015 * memorandum for record (MFR) * two previous Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings * AR 600-8-104 (Personnel-General – Army Military Human Resource Records Management), sections 5-11 through 5-14 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the two previous considerations by the ABCMR in Docket Numbers AR20140016837 on 7 January 2015, and AR20150007177 on 30 July 2015. 2. The applicant provides new argument and documentation not previously considered by the Board. Therefore, the Director of the ABCMR opined that the applicant's new evidence is worthy of reconsideration by the Board. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 28 January 2003 and he is a health care specialist. He was promoted to sergeant (SGT)/E-5 on 1 September 2008. He reenlisted in the RA on 30 October 2008 and is still serving on active duty. 4. He provides: a. PO Number 041-013, dated 10 February 2009, issued by 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) (2nd Award) for the period from 28 January 2006 through 27 January 2009. b. MFR, 1 October 2015, in which the applicant's company commander requested the applicant be allowed to receive his first award of the AGCM for the period from 28 January 2003 through 27 January 2006 and third award for the period from 28 January 2009 through 27 January 2012. Based on this MFR, three orders were issued by Headquarters, 15th Brigade Support Battalion, 2nd Infantry Division, on 9 September 2015, awarding him the AGCM for the following periods: * Number 252-01 (1st Award) – 28 January 2003 through 27 January 2006 * Number 252-03 (3rd Award) – 28 January 2009 through 27 January 2012 * Number 252-04 (4th Award) – 28 January 2012 through 27 January 2015 c. MILPER Message Number 10-222 (Clarification, Enlisted Promotions and Reductions, Procedural Guidance for Implementing the Soldier Self-Service DA Form 3355 (Promotion Point Worksheet)), dated 16 August 2011, in which he highlighted the section stating "Soldiers will be responsible for maintaining and safeguarding all promotion related documents. Commanders and first sergeants may, at any time, require a Soldier to bring in promotion documents for review…Soldiers can only change promotion points in the following categories: awards, certificates of achievement, and hazardous duty points (airborne)." Further, the battalion S-1 will provide the DA Form 3355, ERB, commander’s recommendation, and source documents used in the preparation of the DA Form 3355 for Soldiers recommended for promotion board appearance to the board recorder. d. MILPER Message Number 11-033 (Guidance for the Revised Semi-Centralized Promotions System), dated 7 February 2011 and 15 March 2011, in which he highlighted the sections pertaining to the approaching upgrade of the Army's Active Component Automation System to support the paperless promotion point computation system. This guidance stated that by 1 June 2011 the automated calculation of promotion points would be based on Soldier’s personnel and training data maintained in both the electronic military personnel office (eMILPO) and the Army Training Requirements and Resources Systems (ATRRS). The Guidance states that incorrect promotion scores because of missing or inaccurate eMILPO and ATRRS information will not be a basis for promotion score adjustments effecting previously announced promotions. Human resource managers/specialists were encouraged to update eMILPO and ATRRS to ensure the most accurate data was electronically available for the automated promotion scores. e. MILPER Message Number 13-055 (Soldier Record Accuracy), dated 26 February 2013, provided guidance and clarification on the responsibilities for updating Soldiers’ records. It restated the fact that Soldiers are responsible to annually review and update their personnel records. The annual review normally occurs during in/out processing, promotion board preparations and Soldier readiness processing. If none of these event occur within 12 months, then Soldiers must conduct annual record reviews with their supporting S-1 or military personnel detachment. Battalion S-1s are required to provide Soldiers with their ERB and assist them in updating, validating and uploading substantiating documents (evidence) to support entries on the ERB. f. ERB, dated 4 November 2013, in which he highlighted the following in Section VIII (Awards and Decorations): Army Commendation Medal (2nd Award), Army Achievement Medal (5th Award), National Defense Service Medal, and AGCM (2nd Award). While he did not highlight it, this ERB shows he received the Combat Medical Badge and had three combat tours in Iraq. g. ERB, dated 2 October 2015, in which he highlighted the following awards in Section VIII: Army Commendation Medal (1st Award), Army Achievement Medal (2nd Award), and AGCM (4th Award). This ERB does not show he received the Combat Medical Badge. 5. A review of his records located on iPERMS documents the four orders for the AGCM. His record is void of Combat Medical Badge orders. The following award orders are shown in his iPERMS and 2015 ERB. a. PO Number 265-955 issued by 1st Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized) awarding him the Army Commendation Medal on 21 September 2008. b. PO Number 088-037 issued by 10th Transportation Battalion awarding him the Army Achievement Medal on 24 February 2010. c. PO Number 22-12 issued by 24th Transportation Battalion awarding him the Army Achievement Medal (2nd Award) on 2 August 2011. 6. HRC previously opined in an advisory opinion that he did not meet the Department of the Army announced centralized promotion cut-off score for his MOS in 2014. In his rebuttal statement, he did not provide evidence to show award of the Combat Medical Badge. REFERENCES: 1. AR 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotion and Reductions) prescribes the policies and procedures governing promotion and reduction of Army enlisted personnel. It provides for the management and operation of semi-centralized boards and governs the SGT and SSG promotion system for Active Army. It states that field-grade commanders in units authorized a commander in the grade of lieutenant colonel or higher have promotion authority to the grades of SGT and SSG; however, the promotion branch at the servicing personnel center maintains the recommended list and issues the orders. Field operations will handle board appearance, promotion point calculation, promotion list maintenance, and the final execution of the promotion occurs in the field in a decentralized manner. Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) operations will handle promotion cutoff scores and the monthly SGT/SSG promotion selection by-name list, which are determined and announced monthly. HQDA will determine the needs of the Army by grade and MOS. Promotion to SGT and SSG is announced in orders. 2. AR 600-8-104, chapter 5, explains the documents required and the processes for updating specific data on the appropriate record brief. The brigade S1 personnel automation section chiefs, unit administrators, and military personnel divisions will utilize personnel automation tools to correct personnel records. Paragraph 5-13 of the regulation states awards and decorations must be web uploaded to iPERMS for inclusion in the OMPF before updating the Soldier's appropriate record brief. 3. AR 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Combat Medical Badge is awarded to medical department personnel (colonel and below) who are assigned or attached to a medical unit of company or smaller size that is organic to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental or smaller size which is engaged in active ground combat. Battle participation credit is not sufficient; the infantry unit must have been in contact with the enemy and the Soldier must have been personally present and under fire during such ground combat. As with all awards and badges, announcement in official orders is required. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends, in effect, that his request for retroactive promotion to SSG with entitlement to back pay and allowances should be reconsidered after his ERB is corrected to show all authorized awards to include the Combat Medical Badge. 2. It is acknowledged that his 2013 ERB shows the Combat Medical Badge and that his 2015 ERB shows it was removed. All the guidance clearly states that Soldiers are responsible for verifying and maintaining their records. The promotion guidance states that a commander or first sergeant can request a Soldier provide supporting documents to support each entry on the automated Promotion Point Worksheet. During a review of the applicant’s record, it was determined no orders were available to verify the Combat Medical Badge so personnel removed this award from his ERB and subsequently from his Promotion Point Worksheet. To date, the applicant has not provided a copy of the orders that announced this badge. While he claims personnel acted ?illegally,? the guidance clearly shows that his chain of command to include the S-1 acted within the scope of their responsibilities. As there are no Combat Medical Badge orders, there was no requirement to conduct an investigation as he purports in his argument. 3. Concerning the AGCM, it appears in 2015 his commander requested publication of orders announcing the first and third AGCM. As he was also eligible for the AGCM (4th Award), the awards issuing authority published three separate orders. The promotion and records review guidance states that periodic reviews are conducted in the preparation of a Soldier’s promotion board packet. As the applicant was eligible for the AGCM in 2006 and 2012, he had an opportunity to approach his unit commander earlier than 2015 and request appropriate orders be issued. As these orders were issued in 2015, there is no policy or regulatory requirement that directs the retroactive recalculation of his 2014 Promotion Point Worksheet to show these two additional awards. 4. While he argues ?illegal? corrections were made to his ERB and subsequent Promotion Point Worksheet, it appears from reviewing the MILPER messages and regulatory guidance, that because he could not produce the order that announced the Combat Medical Badge, it was removed from his ERB. Based on its removal from his ERB, it was not included in his 2014 Promotion Point Worksheet. His automated 2014 Promotion Point Worksheet correctly shows one Army Commendation Medal and two Army Achievement Medals. These medals are supported by orders filed in his OMPF. Based on a review of his OMPF, the awards and decorations listed on his 2013 ERB and 2013 automated Promotion Point Worksheet are not supported with orders. Again, this is not an illegal action rather it is an administrative correction based on the evidence of record. It is the applicant’s responsibility to provide copies of orders for all awards listed on his ERB and automated Promotion Point Worksheet. When he did not provide the evidence, appropriate action was taken. 5. HRC previously opined that he did not meet the DA announced cut-off score for his MOS in 2014. Then and now, there is insufficient evidence to show he met the promotion cut-off scores for promotion to SSG for his MOS. 6. He did not provide sufficient evidence and his records contain none to overcome the presumption of administrative regularity that exists in the absence of evidence to show otherwise. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150016610 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150016610 7 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2