MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 26 February 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001062470

         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.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Joann Langston		Chairperson
Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member
Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. 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.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

---

APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, reconsideration for promotion to major.

APPLICANT STATES: There were two items that the selection board did not see in his records. The first item missing was an officer evaluation report (OER) from June 1994, which consisted of 15 days of Annual Training with the Mobile District, US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the second item missing was his Master of Science in Management Degree from Troy State University. He performed inactive duty training with the 416th Engineer Command in order to
earn retirement points for the month of September 1994. In support of his application, he submits a copy of his microfiche, which contains a copy of his OER, and a copy of his Master of Science in Management Degree from Troy State University, dated 11 December 1992.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show he was commissioned as a second lieutenant on 26 May 1982, and entered active duty on 10 June 1982.

He was promoted to the rank of captain/0-3 on 1 February 1986.

On 1 September 1992, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-120, chapter 3, for miscellaneous reasons (Unqualified Resignation). He was transferred to the USAR Control Group Individual Ready Reserve (IRR).

The applicant provided a copy of his microfiche which shows that he received
a relief from active duty training (REFRAT) OER for the period 20 June to 1 July 1994 (12 days).

The applicant provided a copy of his Master of Science in Management Degree from Troy State University, dated 11 December 1992.

The applicant was honorably discharged from the USAR on 4 September 2001, under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-175.

In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was provided by the
Chief, Promotion & Notifications Branch, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components. The applicant was provided 30 days to submit matters in rebuttal to this opinion; however, the applicant had not responded in over 90 days.

The opinion stated that the applicant was considered, but not selected by the 1994 and 1995 Major, Department of the Army Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB). The Board consideration files were kept for five years and then



destroyed and were no longer available for review. The applicant had requested reconsideration for promotion by a special selection board. He stated that there were material omissions in his record at the time of the original board and that
he had a copy of his microfiche from the time the 1994 board was held, which was a more current version. He indicated that there were two items that the selection board did not see in his records, an OER from June 1994 for 15 days and his Master of Science in Management Degree from Troy State University. The opinion stated, after reviewing his request, that information shows that he was not passed over for education. The evaluation system reflects an OER for
the period 20 June to 1 July 1994, for 12 days and reflects being processed on 17 October 1994. The applicant was given a senior rater profile reflecting second block, the only one rated by his senior rater, which is considered to have an immature profile. In addition, the applicant has seven below center of mass, and one “DO NOT PROMOTE” OER in addition to the report with the immature profile. This report is not considered a valid report for the 1994 board due to the through date being after the 1994 recess date. The opinion also stated that the applicant did not send in a copy of his microfiche from the 1994 board, only a calendar year 2000 fiche. The Master of Science in Management Degree from Troy State University was awarded on 11 December 1992, and was in hard copy.

The opinion concluded that, since the applicant was not passed over for education, and based on the average/below average officer evaluation reports,
the applicant’s application should be denied.

Army Regulation 135-155 prescribes the policies and procedures for promotion of Reserve officers. The regulation provides that mandatory selection boards will be convened each year to consider Army Reserve officers in an active status for promotion to captain through lieutenant colonel. The regulation provides that in order to be qualified for promotion to major an individual must have completed
Combined Arms Services Staff School (CAS3), 7 years of time in grade (TIG) as a captain, and an officer advanced course (OAC) on or before the convening date of the respective promotion board.

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.

Army Regulation 135-175 provides policy, criteria, and procedures governing the separation of officers of the Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) and the United States Army Reserve (USAR), except for officers serving on active duty or active duty training exceeding 90 days. Paragraph 4-4 pertains to the removal from an active status. It states, in pertinent part, that officers in the grade of first lieutenant, captain, or major who completed their statutory military obligation, will be discharged for failure to be selected for promotion after second consideration by a DA Reserve Components Selection Board.
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 Board notes that the applicant was properly considered for promotion by the 1994 and 1995 RCSB’s. The Board also notes that he was not selected for promotion by the 1994 and 1995 RCSB’s and that he was subsequently discharged based on his nonselections.

2. The alleged missing OER was not eligible for review by the 1994 RCSB. The evaluation system reflected a processing date of 17 October 1994 and there is no evidence to indicated that it was not seen by the 1995 RCSB.

3. The contention that a copy of his Master of Science Degree was not seen by either promotion board is not considered relevant since advanced civilian education is not a requirement for promotion nor a basis for standby promotion consideration.

4. 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.

5. 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

__jl___ ___rd__ ___rw_____ DENY APPLICATION

                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001062470
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	20020226
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 140-10
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 310
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.