APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his nonselection for promotion to lieutenant colonel (LTC) be reconsidered.
APPLICANT STATES: That he believes that certain official documents were not in his file at the time he was considered for promotion by the 1994 LTC Selection Board. Specifically, he says the file lacked documentation showing that he had completed the Command and General Staff Officer Course, that he had completed his college degree and his official photograph was also missing. In support of his request, he has provided copies of the aforementioned documents.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was considered but not selected for promotion to LTC by the 1994 Department of the Army Reserve Component Selection Board. The specific reason for his nonselection, however, is not revealed by promotion boards.
The US Total Army Personnel Command in a comment to the Board (ATTACHED) indicated that the applicants file was complete when reviewed by the promotion board. The file reflected completion of 100 percent of the Command and General Staff Officers Course and his Bachelor of Arts degree. The absence of a photograph is not a basis for reconsideration by a DA Promotion Advisory Board. The applicant was selected for promotion to LTC by the 1995 annual board. It recommends that his 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(s), it is concluded:
1. The available evidence indicates that his nonselection for promotion was not based on missing documents at the time his file was reviewed by the LTC promotion board in 1994. In fact, he has not shown that there were any serious administrative deficiencies with his records that might have led to his nonselection.
2. In view of the foregoing, there appears to be 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
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011214C070208
The record does not contain a copy of the applicant's first nonselection notification from the Army Reserve Components Selection Board that was convened in March 2000. The Chief also noted that the letter from the applicant's Congressman was not of record. To be considered for promotion to major the applicant needed to have completed an officer advanced course before the convening date of the promotion board.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9509193C070209
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. 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 states, in pertinent part, that Department of the Army Standby Advisory Boards (STAB) are formed to prevent any...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021882
A review of his records maintained in the interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) revealed that HRC-St. Louis (HRC-STL), issued the applicant a notification of promotion status memorandum, dated 3 July 2007, advising him he had been considered and was not among those selected for promotion by the Department of the Army Reserve Components Mandatory Selection Board that convened on 12 March 2007. Army Regulation 135-175 provides that an officer in the grade of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083371C070212
The applicant was informed that, since the records showed that he had declined promotion to major, his promotion to major had been adjusted to 1 October 1985 and his name was removed from the 1989 and 1990 promotion board results. There is no evidence of record, or evidence provided by the applicant or counsel, that a promotion memorandum was ever issued for LTC. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant is not entitled to any of these claims and this Board specifically...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009101
On 8 March 2001 the applicant was notified that he had been nonselected for promotion due to noncompletion of the required educational requirement. Army Regulation 135-155, Table 2-2 lists the military educational requirements for commissioned officers being considered for promotion from major to lieutenant colonel (LTC) as completion of at least fifty percent of the Command and General Staff Officers Course (CGSOC) or its equivalent. It appears the applicant did not commence the required...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058285C070421
On 7 August 1996, the ABCMR recommended that the applicant’s discharge be revoked and that he be promoted as though he had been selected by the original promotion board (case AC96-07492). The board consider the applicant for promotion. He should be first considered for promotion to LTC by the CY2004 promotion board.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007551
The reason shows completion of 20 or more years reserve duty. The notification memoranda specifically state that the board examined the performance portion of her official military record and that selection boards do not record the reason for the selection or nonselection of individual officers. There is no available evidence showing why her records were considered by four promotion boards, or that there was confusion over her promotion eligibility.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056735C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. When the Board corrected this error, he was selected for promotion. Even if an argument were made that the selection rate for CGSC was higher than for promotion to LTC, that would not negate the fact that promotion selection boards and school selection boards consider different criteria in making their determinations for selection or nonselection.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9606484C070209
However, he states he was again not selected for promotion because his promotion file was still not complete. The PERSCOM advisory opinion notes his records were complete, including his photograph, ORB, January 1994 evaluation report and advanced course completion certificate, when considered by the standby board which convened in April 1995 but he was again non-selected for promotion. Standby promotion boards are convened to prevent any injustice to an officer or former officers who were...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081524C070215
The evidence of record shows the applicant submitted a request to PERSCOM for promotion reconsideration by the FY98 LTC Chaplain Promotion Selection Board. The evidence of record shows the applicant submitted a second request for promotion reconsideration. There is no evidence available to the Board which shows that the applicant's awards or decorations were removed from the ORB submitted to the FY99 promotion selection board.