| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Stephanie Thompkins | Analyst |
| Mr. Luther L. Santiful | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Charles Gainor | Member | |
| Mr. Joe R. Schroeder | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration for promotion to colonel.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was not considered for promotion to the grade of colonel in the United States Army Reserve (USAR), as a result of administrative oversight or material error.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which show the applicant is a Reserve officer who has been considered and not recommended for promotion to colonel under 1995 criteria.
The applicant’s request, dated 23 April 1996, was received and retained by the Office of Promotions, Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) for authority to conduct special selection boards (SSB’s) for promotion reconsideration to colonel.
The PERSCOM, at the request of this Board, arranged for the applicant’s records to be reviewed by USAR SSB’s under the original selection criteria. Thereafter, the PERSCOM advised that the officer was not recommended for promotion to the grade of colonel, USAR.
The applicant’s records have previously been reviewed by an appropriate SSB for promotion consideration to the grade of colonel, USAR, under the 1994 criteria and he was not recommended for promotion. He has been notified of these results.
Current promotion policy provides, in part, that to be fully qualified for selection, a member must be in the zone of consideration, on active duty or participating satisfactorily in Reserve training, qualified physically, morally and professionally, capable of performing the duties of the next higher grade under mobilization conditions, educationally qualified (commissioned officers only), and that, for certain specialty fields, individual must possess the appropriate SSI and/or other qualifications.
The policy further provides that, to select those who are best qualified, the selection board must first determine which members of a group are fully qualified, and that the best qualified are then selected from that group.
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. The applicant’s available records have now been reviewed by the appropriate SSB for promotion consideration to the grade of colonel, USAR, and he was not recommended for promotion under the 1995 criteria.
2. The consideration for promotion by the SSB has accorded the applicant a fair and complete consideration for promotion under the 1995 selection criteria as intended by statute and regulation.
3. The Board notes that the applicant was considered and not selected by an SSB under 1994 criteria.
4. Because promotion boards are not permitted to disclose the reasons for non-selection for promotion, there is no record of why the applicant failed to be selected. In this regard, it must be noted that the selection board that considered the applicant for promotion was instructed to selected not only those who were considered fully qualified for promotion, but those who were considered best qualified for promotion from the fully qualified group. Accordingly, it must be concluded that, when reviewed by the SSB the applicant’s overall record failed to meet the standards established for selection on a best-qualified basis.
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 material error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
_jrs_____ _lls______ _cg______ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001062139 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011010 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 131.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062137C070421
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : Incorporated herein by reference are military records which show the applicant is a Reserve officer who has been considered and not recommended for promotion to colonel under 1993 criteria. The applicant’s request, dated 13 July 1998, was received and retained by the Office of Promotions, PERSCOM for authority to conduct special selection boards (SSB’s) for promotion reconsideration to colonel. The PERSCOM, at the request of this Board, arranged for the applicant’s...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058075C070420
On 19 April 2000, he was advised by the DCSPER, UT ARNG that he was eligible for consideration by the 2000 lieutenant colonel chaplain Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB). Error or injustice may not be readily apparent in this case; however, the Board concludes that the UT ARNG and the applicant understood that he would not be considered in 2000 and had until his next selection board to prepare for promotion consideration. The Board further concludes that the applicant’s 2000...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010374C070208
The applicant's Officer Record Brief shows he was assigned with the 343rd Support Center, Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) from 28 March 1994 to 1 December 1996, and he was promoted to major/O-5 (MAJ/O-5) on 22 June 1995. On 17 May 2004, the Chief, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, informed the applicant that a Special Selection Board (SSB) convened to consider him for promotion to LTC under the 2002 criteria; however, he was again not selected for promotion, which confirmed...
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 | 2001052247C070420
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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD :...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052779C070420
The applicant states, in effect, error of improper instructions to the promotion boards and an illegible microfiche presented to the boards seriously prejudiced him, resulting in material unfairness and denied rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. He further states that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) should grant relief in the form of reconsideration for promotion to COL by SSB’s, and rewriting paragraph G-4(3) in the instructions...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050008844
Counsel requests, in effect, that the applicant be reconsidered for promotion by a new SSB, and if promotion is denied, that he be provided the rationale for his non-selection. Counsel's contention that the applicant is entitled to promotion reconsideration by a second SSB because he was not provided a full explanation of why he was not selected by the SSB in 2003, and the supporting evidence he provided, were carefully considered. In the applicant's case, the "best qualified" method was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063917C070421
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. The document submitted by the applicant shows that on 22 August 2001, the Promotion and Notifications Branch, Office of Promotions, PERSCOM, advised the applicant that due to information that reflects that his records were omitted from the promotion boards for 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998, he must request promotion consideration to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085330C070212
Counsel states that the applicant was unlawfully non-selected for promotion to LTC by two Standby Advisory Boards (STAB) convening in December 2000 and May 2001 under 1998 and 1999 criteria, when the Army Reserve Personnel Command (AR-PERSCOM) failed to properly expunge derogatory documents from his official military personnel file (OMPF) microfiche. The applicant appealed to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) on 1 August 1995 to be retained on active duty as an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080028C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The regulation further specifies that BA degrees required for Reserve promotion to captain or above, must be completed not later that the day before the selection board convening date and all commissioned officers initially appointed on or after 1 October 1987 must posses a BA degree from an accredited institution recognized by the United States Secretary of Education. ...