| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Stephanie Thompkins | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Margaret V. Thompson | Member | |
| Mr. William D. Powers | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Promotion to lieutenant colonel (LTC) and return to active Reserve status.
APPLICANT STATES: That he should have been selected for LTC and continued to served based on a small number of officers in his Senior Rater (SR) profiles reflecting an inaccurate potential with center of mass reports on his officer evaluation reports (OER’s). He further states that reviews of his rater and SR comments by promotion boards were not accurately assessed.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was appointed in the Reserve as a second lieutenant effective 22 February 1979 and entered on active duty.
He attained the grade of captain effective 1 February 1983.
He was released from active duty for failure of selection for permanent promotion effective 1 July 1990. He was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).
He was considered and selected for promotion to major by the 1991 Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB). He was promoted to major effective 25 February 1991.
He was considered and not selected for promotion to LTC by the 1997 and 1998 RCSB’s. The board did not divulge the reason(s) except that it was not for lack of military education.
His records did not contain material error when considered by the 1997 and 1998 selection boards.
He was honorably separated on 4 October 1999.
Current Reserve promotion policy specifies that promotion reconsideration by a special selection (SSB) board may only be based on erroneous non-consideration or material error, which existed in the records at the time of consideration. Material error in this context is one or more errors of such a nature that, in the judgment of the reviewing official (or body), it caused an individual’s non-selection by a promotion board and, that had such error(s) been corrected at the time the individual was considered, a reasonable chance would have resulted that the individual would have been recommended for promotion.
The policy further provides that boards are not required to divulge the proceedings or the reason(s) for non-selection, except where an individual is not qualified due to non-completion of required military schooling.
This policy also specifics that individuals twice not selected for promotion to major will be transferred to the Retired Reserve if they are eligible and request such transfer, or retained in the active Reserve when more than 18 but less than 20 qualifying years of service have been completed, or discharged.
The Chief, Promotion and Notifications Branch, Office of Promotions, PERSCOM, expressed the opinion that the applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to LTC by the 1997 and 1998 RCSB’s. His files contained all of his pertinent documents when viewed by the boards. The specific reason he was not selected is unknown. Selection boards are prohibited by law to record or divulge their reason for selection or non-selection. The applicant did however have 6 years inactivity making him less competitive with his peers and the last six OER’s were center of mass (average). OER’s are the primary tools used by selection board in making their determination of promotion. The applicant’s concerns questioning inconsistencies in the SR profiles can be addressed to the United States Army Reserve Personnel Command, Evaluations Office for appeal action if warranted under Army Regulation 623-105. Based on his file being complete, it was recommended his application be denied.
The opinion was forwarded to the applicant for his acknowledgment/rebuttal on 14 May 2001. He did not respond.
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 view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to promotion reconsideration to LTC by an SSB. He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.
2. The Board has noted his contention that the promotion selection boards did not properly review his rater and SR comments on promotion; however, it is not supported by his application. His records were completed and without material error and included all pertinent documents when reviewed by the 1997 and 1998 promotion selection boards.
3. The Board further notes that as shown in this case, promotion is not automatic based on qualifications alone, but includes a competitive process of
an RCSB determining an individual's potential and ability to perform at the higher grade. Promotion and retention is keenly competitive, and many officers will not be selected.
4. Implicit in the Army’s promotion system is the universally accepted and frequently discussed principle that officers have a responsibility for their own careers. The general requirements and working of the system are widely known and specific details such as RCSB dates and promotion zones are widely published in official, quasi-official and unofficial publications, and in official communications. The applicant needed to insure, well in advance, that his record would present his career and qualifications to that board in the best possible light.
5. 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.
6. 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
_mvt____ __wdp__ _jns____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001054867 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010724 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 131.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061088C070421
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. He was considered and not selected for promotion to colonel by the 1997, 1998 and 1999 Reserve Components Selection Boards (RCSB’s). The promotion boards do not divulge the proceedings or reasons for non-selection, and this Board cannot determine why he was not selected for promotion.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070008239
On 17 May 1999, the HRC-St. Louis, Missouri, Deputy Chief, Officer of Promotions, responded to the applicant informing him that: a. he was considered for promotion to LTC by the 1996, 1997, and 1998 Reserve Component Selection Board (RCSB), but was not recommended for promotion. Note that for the DA Form 67-8 the rating system depicted below has six entries: the first two entries are derived from the rater performance and potential blocks, expressed in numerals, with 1 the highest and 5 the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001051960C070420
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that her civilian and military education and two officer evaluation reports (OER’s) were missing from her records when they were reviewed by the 1997 Reserve Major Promotion Board. Her records did not contain material error when considered by the 1997 and 1998 selection boards. In view of the facts presented, it was recommended that the applicant’s request be denied.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058641C070421
In the alternate, he requests that he be considered for promotion by a special selection board, with instructions to that board that no adverse implication was to be construed by his having only two years of service in the rank of major or the number of officer evaluation reports (OERs) or types of duty assignments to date, and instructions to the board reflecting that in the absence of officer evaluation reports (OERs) during the period 1996-1998 while he was waiting for a decision on his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711722
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of his military records to void his discharge and to show he was selected and promoted to major. Included with his application are memorandums from the National Guard Bureau (NGB) showing the reason he was not selected was based on two evaluation reports showing “Do Not Promote”, and also based on the lack of a baccalaureate degree. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077378C070215
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that his OER’S for the periods of 12 September 1996 through 11 September 1997 and 12 September 1997 through 11 September 1998 were not completed until 25 August 1999, that his rating chain was improper because he was never assigned to the 88 th Regional Support Command (RSC), that none of the requirements of Army Regulation 623-105 were complied with, that he was twice non-selected for promotion to LTC because neither the OER’s or a statement of non-rated time...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091750C070212
The applicant states that he was not provided due process because the majority of his official military personnel file (OMPF) was not available for review by the promotion selection boards and the special selection boards (SSB's). Based upon review of the applicant’s records by the Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM), it was determined that the applicant’s OMPF contained material error when he was considered and not selected for promotion to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064935C070421
APPLICANT STATES : There is no way to compete for COL due to no fault of his own. OER Ending Period Senior Rater Block Rating (* indicates his rating) The Board concluded that it would be unjust to involuntarily separate her again and voided her previous nonselections to MAJ and showed that she was selected for promotion to major by the SSB which considered her for promotion to MAJ under the first year of her eligibility.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069142C070402
The SR, a colonel serving as the brigade commander, rated the applicant as best qualified, with appropriate comments concerning his performance/potential. This regulation specifies that promotion reconsideration by a special selection board may only be based on erroneous non-consideration or material error that existed in the record at the time of consideration. The Board further concludes that the applicant has failed to overcome the presumption that the contested report was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028320
With respect to his promotion, the applicant states in a letter addressed to the Secretary of the Army: * Reserve officers were discriminated against since it was the promotion boards' prior determination (a quota system) that all promotions would go to Regular Army (RA) officers and minorities * his non-selection for promotion to COL is a grave injustice * promotion boards were in violation of equal protection and due process rights of persons considered for promotion under the Fifth...