Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607878C070209
Original file (9607878C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, promotion reconsideration to the rank of captain in the USAR.

APPLICANT STATES:  That at the time he was twice nonselected
for promotion to the rank of captain in the USAR, he was informed by officials at the Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN) that his records indicated that he had three different branches listed in his records, air defense artillery, armor, and medical services.  However, he has always been an engineer officer and his records should have reflected such.  Accordingly, he should be reconsidered for promotion and retained in an active Reserve status.

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

The applicant was commissioned as a USAR second lieutenant on 15 August 1986.  Upon completion of the engineer officer basic course he was detailed as an engineer officer and continued to serve in that capacity in a USAR engineer company in Puerto Rico.  He was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant on 14 August 1989.

On 8 June 1994 the Reserve Command notified the applicant that he had been twice nonselected for promotion to the rank of captain and would be discharged from the USAR.

In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) was obtained from the ARPERCEN.  It opined that a review of the applicant’s records revealed that his records were complete when considered by the 1993 and 1994 Department of the Army Reserve Components Selection Boards and that the applicant has no basis for reconsideration by a promotion advisory board.  Accordingly, the ARPERCEN recommended that his request be denied.

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.  All critical elements, officer evaluation reports, highest military education, highest level of civilian education, and military awards (Silver Star or higher) were present in the applicant’s records when the promotion selection boards considered him for promotion to the rank of captain.  Therefore, there is no basis to grant him promotion reconsideration.

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




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9510712C070209

    Original file (9510712C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be retained in an active Reserve status and that he be reconsidered for promotion to the rank of captain after he receives at least one additional officer evaluation report from his Reserve unit. Paragraph 4-4a of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that members of the Army Reserve will be removed from an active status and discharged or transferred to the Retired Reserve (if eligible), within 90 days after the board reports its findings, for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9509596C070209

    Original file (9509596C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, promotion reconsideration to the rank of captain in the USAR. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: The applicant was commissioned as a USAR second lieutenant on 16 May 1986. It opined that a review of the applicant’s records revealed that his records were complete when considered by the 1993 Department of the Army Reserve Components Selection Board and that the applicant has no basis for reconsideration by a promotion advisory board.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040000374C070208

    Original file (20040000374C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's records show he received an OER for the period 1 May 1989 through 30 April 1990. The evidence of record shows that the applicant contacted USAHRC – STL (AR-PERSCOM at the time) in October 2001 concerning reappointment and was told to contact another office to see if he was eligible. There is insufficient evidence on which to justify a correction to the applicant's records (such as showing that he was discharged from the USAR prior to being twice nonselected for promotion to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062470C070421

    Original file (2001062470C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In pertinent part, Army Regulation 135-155 states that an officer who twice fails to be selected for promotion to captain, major, or lieutenant colonel will not again be considered for promotion and will be removed from an active status. 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: The contention that a copy of his Master of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021882

    Original file (20100021882.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY1996 | 9605380C070209

    Original file (9605380C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although promotion boards do not divulge the reasons for selection or nonselection of officers for promotion, it is known that her nonselection was not related to her not having a baccalaureate degree, as she was commissioned in 1980 and the requirement only applied to Army Nurse Corps officers commissioned on or after 1 October 1986. Not only is there no evidence in the available records to support such a contention, the applicant has also not submitted any evidence which would suggest...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005330C070206

    Original file (20050005330C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that he be reinstated as a warrant officer and promoted to the rank of chief warrant officer three (CW3). Meanwhile, the applicant was selected for promotion to the rank of major; however, because he was serving as warrant officer, he could not accept the promotion. He was again nonselected for promotion before he had completed 1 year working as an engineer warrant officer, before he received an evaluation as a warrant officer, and before he was deemed eligible to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016297

    Original file (20080016297.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Paragraph 3-19 (Promotion Reconsideration Boards) of Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other than General Officers) provides, in pertinent part, that records of officers or former officers will be referred for special selection board action when the Office of Promotions (Reserve Components) determines that a review of a mandatory selection board finds that an officer's records contained a material error. Subsection (a) states, in pertinent...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711245

    Original file (9711245.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. APPLICANT REQUESTS: In...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607218C070209

    Original file (9607218C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his records be corrected to show that he was not nonselected twice for promotion to Lieutenant Colonel (LTC). APPLICANT STATES: That his promotion to Major was on 6 September 1989 not 2 September 1987 therefore, his promotion packet should not have gone to the LTC board until 1995. On 6 September 1989, he was selected for promotion by the 1989 Major Reserve Promotion Board and promoted with a date of rank of 22 December 1987, based on 12 years...