ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD DATE: 17 October 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190006233 APPLICANT REQUESTS: that her rank be corrected to reflect First Sergeant (1SG)/E-8 APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Memorandum for Record – Clearance Verification * Letter of Recognition * DA Form 2166 - (NCO Evaluation Report) (3) * Bronze Star Medal Certificate and Narrative * Memorandum for Record – Reconsideration of Security Clearance * Payment Confirmation letters * Letter of Recommendation (4) * Memorandum for Record – Removal from Promotion Selection List * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states: a. that she was selected for promotion to Master Sergeant (MSG)/E-8 in 2011. She was then frocked to the rank of MSG and laterally appointed to 1SG in 2012. During her subsequent deployment, it was discovered that her original security clearance was never adjudicated. She requested reconsideration of her security clearance and provided multiple letters of support. She was granted an interim clearance that allowed her access to the secure network and secret briefings. She was later notified that her clearance had been denied and that her submission for appeal was sent to the unit that she had previously deployed with. b. she contests that she performed her duties as a first sergeant and never compromised security. She was never sent to a formal board, her clearance was not revoked for cause nor was there a permanent disqualification for clearance. 3. The applicant provides a: * Memorandum for Record (Clearance Verification) dated 14 January 2010 – reflective of her being awarded an Interim Secret clearance * Letter of Recognition dated 8 December 2011 – recognizing the applicant’s selection for promotion to the rank of MSG * DA Form 2166 - (NCO Evaluation Report) – 3 documents covering the periods of 10 February 2012 through 9 February 2015; from 10 February 2012 through 9 February 2014 she was rated as a first sergeant although she was still a Sergeant First Class (SFC)/ E-7 * Bronze Star Medal Certificate and Narrative dated 6 May 2013 – reflective of the applicant being recognized for her performance while deployed in theater * Memorandum for Record ( Reconsideration of Security Clearance) dated 22 May 2013 – reflective of her request to appeal the decision to deny her security clearance based on financial indebtedness; she was deployed during this time * Payment Confirmation letters – reflective of payments being made over the course of several months to address financial indebtedness * Letter of Recommendation – provided by 4 personnel attesting to her work ethic, actions taken to address the security clearance concerns and overall exemplary performance as a first sergeant * Memorandum for Record (Removal from Promotion Selection List) dated 11 March 2014 – reflective of the Human Resources Command (HRC) administratively removing her from the FY12 MSG Promotion list due to the denial of her security clearance * DD Form 214 dated 30 November 2015 – reflective of her retirement at the rank of SFC 4. A review of the applicant’s available military records reflects the following on: * 28 August 1995 – she enlisted in the Army Reserve under the Delayed Entry Program * 22 November 1995 – she was assessed into the Regular Army * 1 December 2005 – she was promoted to SFC * 6 August 2010 – she completed the First Sergeant’s course * 30 November 2015 – she was retired at the rank of SFC 5. The applicant did not provide nor does a review of her records reflect promotion orders to the rank of MSG or lateral appointment to 1SG. 6. See applicable guidance under REFERENCES below. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found the relief is not warranted. 2. The Board noted that there is no evidence of a promotion order. Frocking does not constitute a promotion order. The Board also noted Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions) states that the promotion authority will direct the name of the Soldier be removed from the recommended list if the Soldier fails to qualify for the security clearance required for the MOS in which recommended or competing. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :X :X :X DENY APPLICATION 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. 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. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions) paragraph 1-10 (Non- promotable status) states that Soldiers in the rank of Specialist through MSG are non-promotable to a higher grade when they are without an appropriate security clearance or favorable security investigation for promotion to the grade. Soldiers who lose their required clearance for cause will be removed from the recommended list. 3. Paragraph 1-15 (Security Clearance Requirements) states that promotion to MSG and Sergeant Major requires an interim security clearance or higher. 4. Paragraph 5-27 (Removal from the Recommended List) states that the promotion authority will direct the name of the Soldier be removed from the recommended list if the Soldier fails to qualify, for cause, for the security clearance required for the MOS in which recommended or competing. 5. Paragraph 10-21 (Other reasons for reduction) states that reduction in rank without board action or appeal will be done when a Soldier is promoted using an interim clearance but final clearance is not granted for any reason. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190006233 5 1