ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  12 August 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20180003262


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  a review and correction to his date of rank to sergeant first class (SFC) and a personal board appearance before the Board. 

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

* DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
* DA Form 4187 (Request for Date of Rank Correction)
* Army National Guard Current Annual Statement
* DA Form 1506 (Statement of Service – For Computation of Length of Service for Pay Purposes)
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* DD Form 1966 (Record of Military Processing – Armed Forces of the United States)
* Orders 206-19 (Promotion to SFC), dated 25 July 2005, National Guard Bureau (NGB), Arlington, VA
* Orders 274-14 (Promotion to Master Sergeant (MSG)), dated 30 September 2008, NGB
* U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Forces Warfare Center and School, (USAJFKSFWCS) Memorandum for Record, dated 26 January 2015
* Orders 081-17 (Transition & Separation), dated 21 March 2016, NGB
* Orders 095-81 (Assignment to Special Forces Group), dated 4 April 2016, U.S. Army Installation Management Command (IMCOM), U.S. Army Garrison (USAG), Fort Bragg, NC
* DA Form 4187 (Intra-Group Reassignment), dated 29 April 2016

FACTS:

1.  The applicant states:

	a.  He is very respectively and diligently working to qualify himself to regain his rank of MSG.  He is requesting his date of rank (DOR) for SFC be reviewed and corrected to qualify for the MSG board.  He is a prior service Soldier, he entered active duty on 24 March 2016 at the Military Entrance and Processing Station (MEPS), Raleigh, NC.  On 23 March 2016, without a break in active service, he volunteered to be released from Title 10 Active, Guard, and Reserve (AGR) status as a MSG/E-8 with a DOR of 1 October 2008.  During his transition period, he agreed to a grade reduction to SFC/E-7 with the understanding his DOR would revert back to 14 July 2005, his original date of promotion to SFC.  Instead, his DOR was assigned as 23 March 2016, his reentry date on active duty.  If possible, and at a minimum, adjust his new DOR to 1 October 2008 – his original DOR to MSG while on Title 10 status.

	b.  While at the MEPS, he was told there was no documentation of his new DOR worksheet from the Raleigh Recruiting Office.  Although he had promotion orders in hand, he was advised that his gaining command could make the necessary corrections to his DOR once signed-in.  His gaining unit worked extremely hard to get the correction made, however, he learned MEPS was the sole entity charged with making DOR changes.  He is writing because his current unit, who supports his request, is unaware of any clear process to officially reach out to the MEPS to have this correction made.

2.  The applicant provides several documents as evidence and in support of his efforts to have his DOR reviewed and corrected:

* DA Form 4187 – Date of Rank Correction
* ARNG Current Annual Statement – Verifying his creditable periods of service
* DA Form 1506 – Further verification of his creditable periods of service
* DD Form 214 – His record of service through 23 March 2016
* DD Form 1966(series) – Record of Processing through MEPS onto Active Duty
* Orders 206-19 – Promotion instrument showing original DOR of 14 July 2005
* Orders 274-14 – Promotion instrument showing promotion to MSG
* Memorandum from Commandant, USAJFKSWCS – SF Enlisted Prior Service Accessions Program Approval
* Orders 081-17 – Transition orders from NGB to USAJFKSFWCS
* Orders 095-81 – Assignment orders to 3D Special Forces Group
* DA Form 4187 – Intra-group (3D SFG) reassignment 

3.  The applicant’s service records shows:

	a.  He enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG) on 14 April 1989.  His NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) shows he served as a member of the Alabama ARNG for 26 years, 11 months, and 10 days.  He achieved the rank/pay grade of MSG/(E-8) in the ARNG with a DOR of 1 October 2008.

	b.  Item 23 of his NGB Form 22 shows he was honorably discharged on 23 March 2016, for enlistment in another component of the U.S. Armed Forces IAW National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management), para 6-35b(3).  He was issued a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of RE-1.

	c.  He immediately enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 24 March 2016 in the grade of E-7

	d.  He then reenlisted for an “Indefinite” period up to his retention control point on 
29 January 2018.

	e.  On 20 March 2019, an advisory opinion was received from U.S. Army Recruiting Command (USAREC) in the processing of this case.  A USAREC official recommended approval, supporting the adjustment of his DOR.  A copy of the advisory opinion along with a suspense date was provided to the applicant on 20 March 2019 for his comments in accordance with (IAW) Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1556.  The advisory official recommended approval and stated:

* The applicant qualified for enlistment in the rank/grade of SFC/(E-7) IAW AR 601-210, para 3-16
* USAREC does not have the authority to correct Soldier’s records without approval from the ABCMR, however, recommend the Board adjust DOR IAW AR 600-20, para b(2)a
* The applicant’s DOR for SFC should be 14 July 2005 IAW AR 600-20,       para 2-20b(2)a
* For RA, the DOR of the enlistment grade is the date preceding the reenlistment date by a period equal to the length of time previously served in the RA in the same or higher grade that in which reenlisted
* Service performed prior to reduction to a pay grade lower than that in which a Soldier reenlists is not creditable
* Since the Soldier never served below the rank of SFC since the original promotion and took an administrative reduction from MSG to SFC, he should retain the DOR of 14 July 2005 IAW the regulation mentioned above

	f.  On 20 March 2019, the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), provided ABCMR with an advisory opinion.  HRC’s opinion is a duplication of the response from USAREC.  HRC also opined the applicant should retain his original DOR of 14 July 2005.  However, HRC does not have the authority to correct Soldier’s records without approval from the ABCMR.

	g.  As of 21 April 2019, there was no record of the applicant submitting a response to the advisory opinion.  The CMD will submit his application, supporting correspondence and advisory opinions to the Board for processing and final determination of the case based on available facts and circumstances.

4.  Military Personnel (MILPER) Message Number 16-311 (title: Fiscal Year (FY) 17 Regular Army (RA)/United States Army Reserve (USAR) Active Guard Reserve (AGR) MSG Promotion Board Announcement shows in paragraph 4a the eligibility criteria for consideration to MSG.  Adjustment of the applicant’s DOR would qualify him for promotion consideration beginning with the FY 17 MSG Promotion Board.

5.  Enlisted Promotions Branch, Adjutant General Directorate, HRC (Enlisted Standby Advisory Board (STAB) – https://www.hrc.army.mil/content/Enlisted%20Standby%20Advisory%20Promotion%20), provides guidance and procedures of requesting consideration if a Soldier’s records were not reviewed by a regular board.  Enlisted STABs are governed by AR 600-8-19, paragraph 4-13 for Regular Army and USAR AGR SFC, MSG, SGM Soldiers.

6.  By regulation/directive:

	a.  AR 15-185, the ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing or request additional evidence or opinions.  Additionally, applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the Board; the Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires.

	b.  AR 600-20 (Army Command Policies and Procedures), paragraph 2–20 (Date of rank - enlisted Soldiers), Soldiers in the USAR who subsequently enlist or reenlist without a break in military Service of more than 90 days will retain the DOR of the grade held prior to reenlistment.  For the purpose of this paragraph, a period during which the Soldier was not a member of the Armed Forces is a break in service if such period is in excess of 90 days (for an enlisted person).

	c.  AR 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) states in paragraph 4-13d(1), STABs are convened to consider records of those otherwise eligible Soldiers whose records were not reviewed by a centralized selection board.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board determined that relief was warranted.  Based upon USARC and HRC advisory recommendations, the Board concluded that the applicant’s Sergeant First Class date of rank should be          14 July 2005, and his record should be permitted to be reviewed by an FY17 Enlisted Standby Advisory Board.


BOARD VOTE:
Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

X	X	X	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:	:	:	DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending the applicant’s date of rank to Sergeant First Class to reflect 14 July 2005, and his record should be presented for consideration for promotion to Master Sergeant before an FY17 Enlisted Standby Advisory Board.
	 
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.


REFERENCES:

1.  Army Regulation (AR) 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) states in:

	a.  paragraph 3–16 (Authorized enlistment pay grade determination), that the pay grade on enlistment into the RA will be determined under paragraph 3–17 and the pay grade for enlistment into the Army Reserve will be determined under paragraph 3–18.  Grade determinations submitted to the Commanding General (CG), U.S. Army Recruiting Command (USAREC) will also be evaluated for enlistment eligibility.  The DOR will be adjusted at the time of RA enlistment per Army Regulation 600–20 (Army Command Policy).  Guidance counselors will advise applicants that this entry will be reviewed for correct entry at the first duty station or reception battalion.  All applicants will have the authority for pay grade clearly annotated on the DD Form 1966.

	b.  paragraph 6-12 (DD Form 1966), that the guidance counselor will review and ensure that the DD Form 1966 is properly completed and compare all entries to verification documents and Standard Form (SF) 86 (Questionnaire for National Security Positions).  The final completed DD Form 1966 should be free of errors and must be legible.  Counselor will print all entries.  The instructions for filling out the DD Form 1966 in item 18 (Accessions Data):

* g.  (Pay Grade):  enter a three digit code - first position enter E, second position enter 0, third position enter appropriate number based on entry pay grade
* h.  (Date of Grade):  must be entered as (YYYYMMDD) - PS will have date adjusted at first duly station as appropriate

	c.  paragraph 6–15 (Correction of errors on enlistment forms), that to correct errors found after applicant has enlisted and forms are distributed, an immediate commander or designee may correct minor administrative and typographical errors found after distribution of forms.  A DA Form 4187 will be completed and DD Form 4 or DD Form 1966 will be corrected for RA.  A copy of the approved DA Form 4187 will be forwarded to the Commander, HRC.  The revised page of the DD Form 4 or its entirety will be completed, to include confirmation of enlistment.  The date entered in item 16c by the enlisting officer will reflect the actual date that the oath on the revised DD Form 4 was administered.  “CORRECTED COPY” will be printed in block letters at the top and bottom of each corrected page of the revised DD Form 4.  The corrected pages of the DD Form 4 will be attached to the original DD Form 4.

2.  Army Regulation  600-20 (Army Command Policies and Procedures), paragraph 2–20 (Date of rank, enlisted Soldiers) states that Soldiers in the USAR who subsequently enlist or reenlist without a break in military Service of more than 90 days will retain the DOR of the grade held prior to reenlistment.  For the purpose of this paragraph, a period during which the Soldier was not a member of the Armed Forces is a break in service if such period is in excess of 90 days (for an enlisted person).

3.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions):

	a.  Section IV – Processing Request for Standby Advisory Board (STAB) Consideration, paragraph 4-13 (Rules) states STABs are convened to consider records of those otherwise eligible Soldiers whose records were not reviewed by a centralized selection board.

	b.  paragraph 10-19 (Voluntary reduction) states a Soldier may volunteer for reduction to one or more lower pay grades.  The reduction requested by the Soldier will be accomplished by the promotion authority without prejudice.  Such reductions will normally be limited to Soldiers desiring reduction for voluntary entry on active duty in the Active Army.  Enlistment at a lower grade in the RA, the Delayed Entry Program, the ARNG, or other U.S. Armed Force is a contractual agreement and reduction orders are not issued.  Since the Soldier is discharged from the USAR, without a reduction action and voluntarily contracts to enlist at a lower grade, it is not considered a grade reduction within the meaning of this regulation.  Subsequent contractual reentry into the USAR will not authorize grade restoration.  The DOR will be the date of the grade to which reduced as if the Soldier had never attained a grade higher than that to which reduced.

4.  AR 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR.  The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity, which is that what the Army did was correct.  The ABCMR is not an investigative body and decides cases based on the evidence that is presented in the military records provided and the independent evidence submitted with the application.  The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.  The ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing or request additional evidence or opinions.  Additionally, it states in paragraph 2-11 that applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR.  The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires.

5.  Military Personnel (MILPER) Message Number 16-311 (title: Fiscal Year (FY) 17 Regular Army (RA)/United States Army Reserve (USAR) Active Guard Reserve (AGR) Master Sergeant (MSG) Promotion Board Announcement provides the specific eligibility criteria and other requirements for consideration of selection to MSG.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20180003262


5


1