APPLICANT REQUESTS: The removal of all officer evaluation reports (OER) covering the period 30 August 1979 through 10 December 1984 from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) and promotion reconsideration to the rank of CW3 in the Regular Army (RA). APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that the aforementioned OER’s were rendered during his prior active service as a commissioned officer and the presence of them in his OMPF serves to create an unfair and unequal discriminator against him for promotion selection. He further states that the contested OER’s were written at a time when the OER system was new and the standards were quite different. He goes on to state that his responsibilities as a commissioned officer aviator were far different and more complex than those of a warrant officer and that the more stringent rating criteria that was then in effect should not be compared to the present system or his current responsibilities. He also states that his warrant officer peers will have an OER history that is inflated and that when all of his OER’s are compared to theirs, it creates a disadvantage for him. Consequently, the promotion board denied him a fair opportunity to present a true picture of his job performance as a warrant officer; therefore, the OER’s should be removed from his records and he should be reconsidered for promotion to CW3. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: He was commissioned as a USAR second lieutenant on 19 May 1979. He accepted an RA commission on 13 August 1979 and entered active duty as an infantry officer on 30 August 1979. Shortly after entering active duty, he applied for and was accepted for rotary wing (helicopter) aviation training. He successfully completed his training and was assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, as an aviation section leader. He was promoted to the rank of captain on 1 August 1983. On 10 December 1984, after requesting unqualified resignation and a USAR commission, the applicant was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) in the rank of captain. On 7 February 1990, the applicant accepted an appointment as a USAR warrant officer in the rank of WO1. On 30 March 1990 he was ordered to active duty for a period of 4 years as a USAR aviator in the rank of WO1. He was subsequently promoted to the rank of CW2 effective 21 March 1990. On 23 October 1995, the applicant submitted a request for removal of the contested OER’s and promotion reconsideration to the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM). He cited the same reasons for promotion reconsideration to the PERSCOM as he has cited to this Board. The PERSCOM informed the applicant that unless documents were improperly filed, they could not be removed from the OMPF without authorization from proper authorities. This Board was cited as a proper authority. A review of the applicant’s OMPF reveals that the record of his commissioned service and warrant officer service are filed on the same microfiche. His warrant officer service picks up where his commissioned officer service left off. He was nonselected for promotion to CW3 during the fiscal year (FY) 1995 CW3 promotion selection board and will be again considered by the FY 1996 CW3 promotion selection board. Army Regulation 600-8-104 prescribes policies, operating tasks, and steps governing the creation and maintenance of the OMPF. It states, in pertinent part, that the OMPF custodian for Army commissioned and warrant officers is the Commander, PERSCOM. It further states that once started, the OMPF will be continued in use even if the soldier changes grade, changes Army component, enlists or reenlist within 24 hours after discharge, or changes status within an Army component. When a soldier reenters the Army after a break in service, the old OMPF will be sent from the Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN) to the appropriate OMPF custodian. The custodian may transfer all documents to a new OMPF or may continue to use the old OMPF, as appropriate. Additionally, when enlisted soldiers are appointed as commissioned or warrant officers, the performance fiche of their enlisted OMPF will not be provided to officer selection boards. However, when officers change their status to enlisted, their performance fiche (officer) may be provided to enlisted selection boards. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded: 1. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement. 2. The applicant’s contention that his nonselection for promotion was the result of the presence of his commissioned officer OER’s in his OMPF, is without merit. It is well known that promotion selection boards do not release the reasons for selection or nonselection. Therefore, the applicant’s contention is speculative at best and not supported by any evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record. 3. Accordingly, the presence of the applicant’s commissioned officer OER’s in his OMPF is appropriate and in accordance with applicable regulations and there appears to be no good reason to remove them. 4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request. DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. BOARD VOTE: GRANT GRANT FORMAL HEARING DENY APPLICATION David R. Kinneer Executive Secretary