APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That her nonselection for promotion to captain be reconsidered.

APPLICANT STATES:  That she believes that certain official documents were not in her file at the time she was considered for promotion by the 1993 captain Department of the Army Reserve Component Selection Board.  Specifically, she says, the file lacked documentation showing that she had completed a current physical examination, the certificate of completion of the Army Medical Department (AMEDD) Officer Basic Course and the notice of completion of Phase I of the AMEDD Officer Advanced Course. In support of her request, she provides copies of the aforementioned documents.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

She was considered but not selected for promotion to captain by the 1993 Department of the Army Reserve Component Selection Board.  The reasons for her nonselection was not revealed by the selection boards.

The US Total Army Personnel Command in a comment to the Board (COPY ATTACHED) indicates that all critical elements were present in the applicant’s file when it was considered by the 1993 promotion selection board.  Critical elements are officer evaluation reports, highest level of military education, highest level of civilian education and awards of the Silver Star and above.  The Chief of the Promotions and Notification Branch also notes that the applicant was selected for promotion to captain by the 1994 annual board and, therefore, recommends that the applicant’s request be disapproved.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion, it is concluded:

1.  The available evidence indicates that her nonselection for promotion was not based on missing documents at the time her file was reviewed by the 1993 captain selection board.  In fact, she has not shown that there were any administrative deficiencies with her records that might have led to her nonselection.

2. In view of the foregoing, there appears to be 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




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director