| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
2. The applicant requests, in effect, removal of a promotion non-selection memorandum from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).
3. The applicant states, in effect, that a promotion non-selection memorandum, dated 1 March 1996, issued by the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM), St. Louis, was erroneously published and filed in his OMPF. The non-selection memorandum was dated 1 March 1996, but an ARPERSCOM promotion memorandum was published on 13 February 1996 that had authorized his promotion to captain/0-3 (CPT/0-3), effective 7 March 1996. In support of his application, he submits a copy of the ARPERSCOM CPT/0-3 promotion memorandum, dated 13 February 1996, and a copy of the ARPERSCOM
non-selection memorandum, dated 1 March 1996.
4. The applicant’s military records show that he is currently serving in the of rank CPT/0-3 in an active status in the Army National Guard (ARNG).
5. On 13 February 1996, PERSCOM, St Louis, published a memorandum, Subject: Promotion of Reserve Commissioned Officer of the Army, which authorized the applicant’s promotion to CPT/0-3, effective 7 March 1996.
6. On 1 March 1996, PERSCOM, St. Louis, published a memorandum, Subject: Notification of Promotion Status, commonly referred to as a non-selection memorandum. This document indication that the applicant had been considered for promotion to the next higher grade by a recent Reserve Selection Board and had not been recommended for promotion. A copy of this memorandum was filed in the applicant’s OMPF and remains on file at this time.
7. In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the PERSCOM, St. Louis, Chief, Promotions & Notifications Branch, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components (RC). This opinion confirms that as a result of being selected by the 1995 promotion selection board, the applicant was promoted to CPT/0-3 on 13 February 1996. Therefore, he should never have been considered for promotion by the 1996 promotions selection board and his name has now been deleted from 1996 selection board’s official results and the non-selection memorandum in question has been voided. It also recommends that the applicant’s request be approved and that his records be forwarded to the appropriate agency to have the non-selection memorandum deleted from his OMPF. The applicant was provided a copy of this advisory opinion and on
11 April 2002, he concurred with its contents.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that memorandum, dated 1 March 1996, Subject: Notification of Promotion Status, should be removed from his OMPF and it finds this claim has merit.
2. The evidence of records confirms that the applicant was selected and promoted to CPT/0-3 prior to receiving the PERSCOM. St. Louis, memorandum notifying him of his promotion non-selection. Further, PERSCOM, St. Louis, promotion officials have already taken action to void the memorandum in question and recommends it be removed from the applicant’s OMPF. Therefore, the Board concludes it would be appropriate to remove this document from the applicant’s OMPF at this time.
3. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by removing PERSCOM, St. Louis, memorandum, dated 1 March 1996, Subject: Notification of Promotion Status, from the OMPF of the individual concerned.
BOARD VOTE:
__SAC _ __KWL___ __JTM__ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
___Samuel A. Crumpler_
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2001066147 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/05/07 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (GRANT) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 134.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069799C070402
Since the applicant’s date of rank was 29 May 1995, he should not have been considered for promotion by the 1996 board. Based on his review, the RC promotion official recommended that the applicant’s name be deleted from the 1996 (F2) DA RC CPT selection board list and that the 7 May 1998 non-selection memorandum in question be removed from his record. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by deleting the name of the individual concerned from the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084855C070212
The applicant requests, in effect, that his major (MAJ) date of rank (DOR) be adjusted to 30 June 1994 based on the constructive credit he received upon his appointment in the United States Army Reserve (USAR). The record also confirms that based on the applicant’s constructive service credit his PED to MAJ would have been established as 30 June 1994; however, he remained in training in the STRAP through 30 June 1996, and at the applicant’s request in an application to this Board, action...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075357C070403
This memorandum authorized the applicant’s promotion to MAJ and established her DOR as 27 January 2000. As a result, her record was referred to a STAB and she was considered and selected for promotion to MAJ under the criteria established for the 1998 promotion board. However, during the processing of this case, these same promotion officials determined that the 31 August 1998 date was in error, and that the applicant’s promotion date to MAJ should have actually been established as 30...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079695C070215
He also states that RC promotion officials make his case for removing the second non-selection from his records when they admit that he had requested transfer to the Retired Reserve prior to the convening date of the 2002 PSB, and had prompt action be taken he would not have been considered by the 2002 PSB. Although the applicant’s removal date was not formally established by orders or any other authorizing document, it is clear that at the request of ARPERSCOM officials for an immediate...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080090C070215
He also states that RC promotion officials make his case for removing the second non-selection from his records when they admit that he had requested transfer to the Retired Reserve prior to the convening date of the 2002 PSB, and had prompt action be taken he would not have been considered by the 2002 PSB. Although the applicant’s removal date was not formally established by orders or any other authorizing document, it is clear that at the request of ARPERSCOM officials for an immediate...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075956C070403
The effective date of promotion and DOR shall be the same as if the officer had been selected to the grade concerned by the promotion board for RASL officers. The effective date of promotion and DOR shall be the same as if the officer had been selected to the grade concerned by the promotion board for RASL officers. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was selected for promotion to CPT by an active duty Promotion Board and placed on the active duty Promotion Standing List...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077001C070215
It further states that the reasons for non-selection are usually unknown, but in this case, the applicant could not be selected for promotion based on the fact his record did not reflect that he had completed the required civilian education by the convening date of the boards. Therefore, notwithstanding the recommendation of PERSCOM, St. Louis, RC promotion officials, the Board concludes that it would be unjust to deny the applicant promotion reconsideration based on the technicality that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077963C070215
The applicant further states that under the provisions of the ROPMA, any officer appointed to the grade of captain (CPT) before 1 October 1995 is granted an exception to the civilian education requirement for promotion to MAJ. However, given the specificity of the civilian education exception granted to officers appointed to the grade of CPT before 1 October 1995 by 10 USC 12205, and absent any grant of Secretarial discretion in this section of the law, the Board finds that the intent of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063242C070421
At that time, he discovered that his active duty promotion list status should have been carried over to the USAR, but he was advised to continue with the Reserve Component (RC) promotion board process until he became a CPT and attempt to change his promotion date after he was selected for promotion. He further comments that he was considered and not selected for promotion by a RC board in 1999, because the necessary educational documentation was not in his record. The evidence of record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074840C070403
The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge from the United States Army Reserve (USAR) be voided and that he instead be transferred to the Retired Reserve. The evidence of record fails to show that ARPERSCOM personnel officials properly notified the applicant of his option to transfer to the Retired Reserve in connection with his mandated separation from the USAR. Given the facts and circumstances of this case, the Board finds sufficient reason to believe the applicant was never...