MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           14 August 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002083174

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Beverly A. Young		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Ms. Linda M. Barker		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his records be corrected to show he was promoted to colonel.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was unjustly passed over for promotion to the rank of colonel.  In support of his application, he submitted a supplemental letter; several U.S. Army Officer Efficiency Reports covering the periods 1 April 1962 through 24 December 1972; and three letters of recommendation.

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

After having prior service in the Regular Army as an enlisted soldier, he was appointed as a commissioned officer in the Army of the United States (AUS) on 17 October 1944.

He was promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel in the AUS with an effective date of 18 June 1962.

He was promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel in the Regular Army with an effective date of 17 October 1965.

The applicant retired on 18 January 1973 in the rank of lieutenant colonel.

Section III of Army Regulation 624-100 (Promotion of Officers on Active Duty), in effect at the time, governed the promotion to colonel, lieutenant colonel, major, captain, and to chief warrant officer grades W-4 and W-3.  It stated, in pertinent part, that promotion selection boards based their selections on impartial consideration of all officers in the zone.  They considered all factors, including ability, efficiency, seniority, and age.  Selection boards used the "best qualified" method of selection for promotion to major through colonel (except for temporary promotion of Medical and Dental Corps Officers to major and lieutenant colonel), and to chief warrant officers, W-4 and chief warrant officers, W-3.  Under this method, selection boards recommended not to exceed a specified number of officers whom they considered the best qualified to meet the needs of the Army of all fully qualified officers in the zone of consideration.

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 satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2.  Without being able to review all the records or special instructions that were available to the promotion boards that considered the applicant, the Board cannot determine why he was not selected for promotion.  Without evidence to show otherwise, the Board concludes that the officers who were recommended for promotion to colonel were, in the promotion boards' considered opinion, the best qualified.

3.  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

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002083174	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030814	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Mr. Chun	
ISSUES         1.	131.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.