| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Mark D. Manning | Member | |
| Mr. Thomas Lanyi | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be promoted to the rank of colonel.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was nonselected for promotion to the rank of colonel because the promotion board did not have his completion certificates for the Quartermaster (QM) Officer Career Extension Course or the Command and General Staff Extension Course. He contends that given his qualifications, he deserves to be promoted after having served for 30 years.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was born on 12 July 1914 and was commissioned as a United States Army Reserve (USAR) second lieutenant on 11 June 1941. He was ordered to active duty on 3 November 1942. He remained on active duty and was promoted to the rank of major on 25 January 1946. He was released from active duty (REFRAD) on 13 August 1946 and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Ready), where he was promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel (LTC) on 14 March 1951.
His records show that he completed the QM Officer Career Extension Course in May 1963 and the Command and General Staff Extension Course on 2 May 1967. Both completion certificates are contained in his records.
His records also contain yearly notification letters sent to the applicant as early as May 1962, notifying the applicant that he had been considered for promotion and was not selected. On 30 January 1967, the applicant dispatched a letter to the Office of Personnel Operations (Promotion Boards) informing them that he would complete the Command and General Staff Extension Course before 30 June 1967. He indicated that if he was selected for promotion, he would be allowed to remain in the active USAR after June 1967.
On 31 July 1967, the Reserve Components Personnel Administration Center (RCPAC) dispatched a letter to the applicant informing him that the maximum service policy for retention in the Active Reserve, as outlined in Army Regulation 140-10, paragraph 10a (5) ©, required his removal from an active status in the USAR. He was advised that he could elect transfer to the Retired Reserve, otherwise he would be discharged.
On 19 August 1967, he elected to be transferred to the Retired Reserve and also submitted a request for consideration to retain him in an active status, in lieu of transfer to the Retired Reserve. He was 53 years of age at the time.
On 5 September 1967, he was issued a Notification for Eligibility for Retired Pay (20-year letter) at age 60 (12 July 1974).
On 29 September 1967, orders were published which transferred him to the Retired Reserve. The orders also contained special instructions which indicated that in accordance with Section 3848, Title 10, United States Code, the applicant’s mandatory removal date was 10 August 1967. He had 24 years, 9 months and 20 days of creditable service for Retired Pay and 33 years, 1 month and 5 days of service for pay purposes and commissioned service computations.
The applicant applied for and began receiving USAR Retired pay at age 60, effective 12 July 1974, in the rank of LTC.
Army Regulation 140-10 provides the provisions for removal from active status of USAR personnel. It provides, in pertinent part, that USAR officers who are serving in the rank of LTC and have not been selected for promotion, will be removed from active status and transferred to the Retired Reserve (if requested and eligible) or discharged, when they complete 28 years of commissioned service if under age 25 at initial appointment or at age 53 if age 25 or older when appointed. The regulation also provides for removal from an active status for reaching the maximum age, for failure to participate, for being twice nonselected for promotion or medical disqualification.
Army Regulation 135-155 provides policy and procedures regarding the promotion of USAR officers. It provides, in pertinent part, that each officer in the zone of consideration by a mandatory selection board will be notified that they are being considered and informed to review their records. Members of the selection boards are required to take an oath in which they state that they understand that by law, they are obligated not to divulge the proceedings or the results thereof pertaining to selection or nonselection of individuals, except to proper authority.
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. 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.
2. The applicant reached the maximum years of service allowed under the regulatory guidelines and was properly transferred to the Retired Reserve per his request. While the Board understands that he did not desire to terminate his service because he believed that he would eventually be selected for promotion, such is not a basis to remain in the active Reserve when maximum service has been reached.
3. The applicant’s contention that he would have been promoted if the selection board had seen the completion certificates for his courses also appears to be without merit. Not only did the applicant communicate this information to the selection board office, the documents were properly filed in his records.
4. While it is unfortunate that the applicant was not selected for promotion, his contention that he should have been selected, is at best speculative on his part; because like this Board, he does not have the advantage of reviewing all of the records of the eligible officers considered at the time to determine who was best qualified to meet the needs of the Army.
5. Inasmuch as selection boards do not divulge their reasons for selection or nonselection, the Board must presume in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that the applicant received equitable and fair consideration by a duly constituted selection board. Accordingly, the Board will not attempt to second-guess their judgment based on the arguments submitted by the applicant.
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
__mdm __ ___kak__ __tl_____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001065234 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/04/23 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 319 | 131.0900/ADV GRD |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060279C070421
She submits copies of a memorandum dated 21 April 2001, Request for Exception to Policy and Retention; a memorandum dated 23 April 2001, Request for Exception to Army Regulation 140-10; a letter dated 2 July 2001 from the Office of the Chief, Army Reserve; and a memorandum dated 16 July 2001, Request For Revoking of Discharge. Title 10, USC, section 14509 specifies that each Reserve officer of the Army in a grade below brigadier general, who has not been recommended for promotion and is not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023630
The opinion states: a. the applicant was nonselected for promotion the first time by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 Lieutenant Colonel APL Reserve Component Promotion Selection Board Non-AGR (Active Guard Reserve) Board. Inevitably, some officers considered for promotion will not be selected; there are always more outstanding officers who are fully qualified to perform duty at the next higher grade, but who are not selected because of selection capability restrictions. The advisory opinion...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081007C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reinstatement as a Special Forces officer in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) in the rank of major or lieutenant colonel (LTC). He successfully completed his training and remained on active duty until he was honorably discharged on 21 November 1967, upon completion of Officer Candidate School, to accept a USAR commission.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605708C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his nonselection for promotion to lieutenant colonel (LTC), USAR, be reconsidered. The reasons for his nonselection by the second promotion board, are like all promotion boards results, not divulged. It cannot be determined, however, whether he would have been promoted to LTC had this evidence been known by the promotion board, since specific reasons for nonselection may not be revealed.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002607
The applicant states she was not counseled or afforded the opportunity to transfer into the Retired Reserve in accordance with Army Regulation 140-10 (Army Reserve Assignments, Attachments, Details, and Transfers) and Army Regulation 135-155 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) prior to being discharged from the USAR on 30 September 1999. Army Regulation 135-155, paragraph 4-4, states that USAR...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007719
He requested an extension to his discharge date based on the timeliness of his notification and the pending results of the September 2009 LTC APL RC Promotion Selection Board. By memorandum, dated 25 November 2009, he requested an extension of his discharge date based on the timeliness of his notification of discharge, the pending results of the 2009 LTC APL RC Promotion Selection Board, and verification of eligibility for Reserve sanctuary. Paragraph 7-4b states that an officer who twice...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004052C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 January 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050004052 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. He had personally provided the course completion certificate for the Officer Advanced Course (OAC), but it was not provided to the selection board. A 28 April 1988 memorandum notified the Commander, Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021626
The applicant states that he was eligible for consideration for promotion to the rank of colonel by the 1967 Reserve Component Colonel/O-6 Promotion Selection Board; however, the Board failed to act because of missing records and before the next board met he had reached retirement age and lost the promotion he had earned. On 20 December 1975, when the applicant turned age 60, he was transferred to the Army of the United States (AUS) Retired List in the rank of LTC. In order to justify...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009690
The memorandum alerted the applicant of the mandatory education requirements for promotion as specified in Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotions of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other than General Officers). On 6 April 2004, by letter, the applicant was notified that HRC-St. Louis, MO reviewed the Report of Board Proceedings and approved the findings and recommendations of the board. With respect to the applicants discharge, the evidence of record shows that he was not selected...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150011113
On 14 November 2013, in response to his petition to this Board for promotion consideration to LTC by an SSB, the Board granted him relief as follows: * submitting his records to an SSB for promotion consideration to LTC and if before promotion consideration he is removed from the RASL, correct his records by continuing the SSB * if selected for promotion, correct his records by voiding his removal from the RASL (retirement orders) and showing he met the eligibility criteria for promotion...