APPLICANT REQUESTS: Promotion reconsideration to the rank of lieutenant colonel (LTC) in the USAR.
APPLICANT STATES: That a recent review of his records revealed that they did not contain his latest officer evaluation report (OER) or his academic evaluation report (AER), indicating completion of the command and general staff officer course (CGSC). He further states that his assignment manager informed him that his record was not reviewed by the last LTC promotion selection board; therefore, he should receive promotion reconsideration.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant is a USAR major with a date of rank of 1 August 1986. At the time of his application to this Board, he was assigned to a USAR troop program unit (TPU) in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) was obtained from the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM), Office of Promotions, St. Louis, Missouri. It opined that the applicants records were reviewed by the 1993 and 1994 USAR LTC Promotion Selection Boards and that his AER was present in his records when reviewed by those boards. It also opined that all eligible OERs were also reviewed by the boards. The PERSCOM further opined that all of the critical elements (OERs, highest military/civilian education, and awards) were present in the promotion selection board consideration files and that the applicant does not qualify for reconsideration for promotion.
Army Regulation 135-155 provides policy and procedures for the selection and promotion of commissioned officers of the USAR. It states, in pertinent part, that Department of the Army Standby Advisory Boards (STAB) are formed to prevent any injustice to officers or former officers who were eligible for promotion but whose records were, through error, not submitted to a promotion selection board for consideration or contained a material error when reviewed by the board. In determining that a material error caused an officers nonselection by a promotion board, it must first be determined that one or more evaluation reports that should have been seen by a board (based on announced cut-off date) were missing from an officers OMPF, that the officers military or civilian education was incorrect, or that the officer was awarded a Silver Star or higher that was missing from the officers OMPF.
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(s), 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. It appears, based on the information obtained from the PERSCOM, that the applicants records were up to date and that they were properly reviewed by the appropriate promotion selection boards. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, there is no basis to grant the applicant promotion reconsideration.
3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicants 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
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004105677C070208
He states that he submitted a request to correct the errors in his record to the Chief, Promotions Branch, United States Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) and received a denial letter from the Officer Special Review Board (OSRB) with numerous errors in return. He claims the bottom line is that he did complete CGSC before the convening date of the promotion board and because it was not graded in a timely manner, his certificate was not properly on file in his OMPF for consideration by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090470C070212
The applicant states, in effect, that she should receive promotion reconsideration to the rank of LTC because at the time the promotion selection board convened, the officer evaluation report (OER) covering the period from 21 January 2001 through 16 August 2001 was not in her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) at the time the Fiscal Year 2002 (FY02) promotion selection board convened on 26 February 2002. The evidence of record shows that she had already received two COM reports in the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083406C070215
The PERSCOM explained that promotion reconsideration is only authorized for officers nonselected for promotion whose records contained a material error when they were considered by a promotion selection board. Army Regulation 623-105, paragraph 3.45, states that an officer who failed to be selected for promotion by an active-duty promotion board will receive an OER prior to the next promotion board. The rated officer has not received an OER since the convene date of the board that did not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086725C070212
The applicant states, in effect, that he has been unjustly denied promotion reconsideration by the Officer Special Selection Board (OSRB) because that board incorrectly opined that he had not exercised due diligence to ensure that his record was up to date before the promotion board convened. He goes on to state that he was not selected by that board and it was not until an astute board member on the FY2001 selection board recognized that there was period missing that it was discovered that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078025C070215
On 29 March 1996, the applicant submitted a letter to the President of the FY 96 CPT Army Promotion Selection Board, in which he provided a brief history of his prior service in the Marine Corps which contained information that was missing from his ORB, and an explanation for why this information was not in his record. Given the promotion board in question had before it in some form all the information the applicant claimed was missing, the Board finds insufficient evidence to show that a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060005237
x The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. In the processing of this case a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Human Resources Command Alexandria (HRC-Alex), Chief, Promotions Branch, which opines, in effect, that while there was no evidence that an injustice had occurred in the applicants case, he should not be granted promotion reconsideration due to his lack of due diligence to ensure his records were up to date...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013215
The file contained a memorandum for record (MFR) relating to a successful Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) appeal of an Officer Evaluation Report (OER) as a first lieutenant (1LT). She provides: * A self-authored statement * An IG letter, dated 2 July 2013 * Numerous email * Memorandum, Subject: SSB Validation Panel Results FY12, LTC Army OS, dated 10 December 2012 * Promotion board files for FY11, FY12, and FY13 * Officer Record Brief (ORB) CONSIDERATION OF...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071768C070403
It was noted that promotion reconsideration is approved only for non-selected officers whose records contained a material error when they were considered by a promotion selection board. The evidence of record shows the applicant's 2LT OERs were in his file when he was promoted to first lieutenant, captain, and major; however, there is no evidence that the 2LT OERs impacted negatively on those promotions. After a thorough review of the applicant's file, the Board concluded that there was no...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025274
The applicant requests: a. removal of her DA Forms 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report) for the periods 5 November 2003 through 4 June 2004 and 5 June 2004 through 25 February 2005 [herein referred to as the contested OERs] from her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). She also states she/her: * has been in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) for the past 26 years and performed excellent prior to working in an active duty unit * two contested OERs used for the LTC APL board were inaccurate, didnt...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071481C070402
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The regulation in effect at the time provided for standby advisory boards (STAB) in those cases where an officer was eligible for consideration and whose records were not submitted for review and for officers whose records contained material error when viewed by the board. The available evidence shows that the applicant's records, as seen by the 1997 RCSB for promotion to LTC, contained his highest military and civilian education level.