APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That he be reconsidered for promotion for major with his military records reflecting that he has two bachelor of science (BS) degrees.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he is fully qualified for promotion to major.  He has completed all required military and civilian educational requirements.

In support of his application he submits proof that he was awarded two BS degrees.

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

In the processing of this case an advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) was obtained from the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM).  The PERSCOM stated that the applicant’s record was complete when it was considered by the 1996 promotion selection board.  He was not selected for promotion because he had not completed Combined Arms and Service Staff School.  That he completed that school after the selection board adjourned does not entitle him to be reconsidered for promotion.

Army Regulation 135-155, Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers, requires the mandatory consideration of USAR commissioned officers for promotion to the next higher grade at specified times in their careers as determined by the officer’s years in grade and years of commissioned service.  While promotion consideration is mandatory, selection for promotion is contingent on an officer meeting promotion eligibility requirements and whether he or she has satisfactorily participated in Reserve training.  Mandatory promotion consideration to major occurs at 7 years time in grade as a captain.  Paragraph 2-6 and table 2-1.1 specify that to be selected for promotion to major, a captain must complete CAS3 not later than the date the selection board convenes. 

Implicit in the Army's promotion system is the universally accepted principal that officers have a responsibility for their own careers.  The general requirements and workings of the system are widely known and specific details such as selection board dates, eligibility requirements and promotion zones are widely published in official and quasi-official publications and official communications.

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 applicant records were complete and there is no indication that it did not contain documentation which showed that he had completed two BS degrees when he was considered for promotion.  As such there is no material error in which to base a promotion reconsideration in his case.

2.  The foregoing findings and conclusions are in consonance with the advisory opinion from the PERSCOM.

3.  In view of the forgoing, 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




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director