Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067599C070402
Original file (2002067599C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:



         BOARD DATE: 25 APRIL 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002067599

         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
Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Joann Langston Chairperson
Mr. George D. Paxson Member
Mr. Charles Gainor 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: Consideration for promotion to Colonel by a special selection board (SSB).

APPLICANT STATES: That his complete the record officer evaluation report (OER) was not included in his records when reviewed by the FY01 Colonel, Army Nurse Corps selection board which convened in July 2001. He was not selected for promotion by that board, but was informed that he could request consideration by a re-look (SSB) board. He did, but his request was denied. This was unfair as he was not evaluated with his peers. Upon identifying the error, personnel branch tried to get his record before the board; however, the board would not accept it even though the review process had not begun.

He states that his OER was finalized in May 2001, submitted to the Personnel Division at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, but was not processed in time to be considered by the selection board. By the time the error was discovered, the date for accepting the OER had passed; however, the review of records [by the selection board] had not begun. Attempts were made to have the OER included in his records before the board, but those attempts were rejected. Informed that he could request consideration by a re-look board, he did and was denied. The Inspector General stated that no regulatory violation occurred.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:

The applicant is an Army Nurse Corps lieutenant colonel who was a Health Systems Analyst/Administrative Officer with the Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) when he received a complete the record OER for the period 6 June 2000 through 4 May 2001. That report was completed and signed by the rating officials and by the applicant on 31 May 2001. The report was received at the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) on 10 July 2001 and is a center of mass report.

In a 10 July 2001 message to a colonel at WRAMC the Assistant Chief of Staff for Personnel at the North Atlantic Regional Medical Command indicated that the above mentioned OER did not make it to PERSCOM because of an oversight on the part of the military personnel office (MILPO). That officer stated that she was ready to hand carry it to the board room because the board had not started reviewing records, but the OER branch would not allow her to do so. Other messages included with the applicant’s request also indicate that the OER was not timely processed.

On 15 October 2001 the applicant requested consideration by a special selection board based on the omission of the complete the record OER. On 29 November 2001 PERSCOM denied his request, stating that promotion reconsideration was authorized and approved only for non-selected officers whose records contained a material error when they were considered by a promotion selection board. PERSCOM stated that a material error was of such a nature that, in the judgment of the reviewing official, had it been corrected at the time the individual was considered by the board that failed to recommend him for promotion, it would have resulted in a reasonable chance that the individual would have been selected for promotion. PERSCOM continued by saying that his report was processed on 10 July 2001, but should have arrived on or before 3 July 2001, and since it was not a mandatory OER, its absence from his file did not constitute a basis for promotion reconsideration.

Army Regulation 600-8-29 prescribes policies and procedures governing promotion of Army officers on the active duty list. Paragraph 1-33 pertains to information provided to selection boards and states in pertinent part that evaluation reports for officers in the zone of consideration must be administratively correct and received in Evaluation Reports Branch, PERSCOM, by the due date identified in the selection board notice announcing the zone of consideration and date the board convenes, in order to be provided to selection boards. It also states that evaluation reports that have not been processed through the Evaluation Reports Branch will not be given to a board. Exceptions apply to other than complete the record reports.

Paragraph 7-2 states in pertinent part that special selection boards may be convened when HQDA discovers that the board that considered an officer did not have before it some material information (SSB discretionary). An officer will not be considered or reconsidered for promotion by an SSB when an administrative error was immaterial, or the officer, in exercising reasonable diligence, could have discovered and corrected the error in the ORB (Officer Record Brief) or the OMPF (Official Military Personnel File). The SSB will not consider an officer for promotion when the board [selection board] did not consider correspondence to the board president that was delivered to PERSCOM after the cutoff date for such correspondence established in the promotion board zone of consideration message.

MILPER Message Number 01-114, 12 March 2001, provided information concerning the FY01 Colonel, Army Nurse Corps promotion board zones of consideration, stated that the selection board would convene on or about 10 July 2001, and that in order to be eligible for consideration by the board, all evaluation reports must be received, error free, in the Evaluation Reports Branch, PERSCOM, not later than 3 July 2001.

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. Notwithstanding the processing error, the applicant himself should have ensured that his evaluation report was processed in time to be considered by the selection board, especially in view of the effect the report could have on his career. Further, It would appear to this Board that the applicant should have had no difficulty in ensuring that his report was submitted on time in view of his proximity to PERSCOM.

2. PERSCOM has determined that there is no material error, that is, the inclusion of the report would not have resulted in his selection for promotion. This Board believes that there is no error or injustice done the applicant, and consequently, no justification for promotion reconsideration by a special selection board.

3. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.

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 that 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:

__CG___ ________ __JL____ GRANT

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ __GDP__ ________ DENY APPLICATION



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




INDEX

CASE ID AR2002067599
SUFFIX
RECON YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED 20020425
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. 131.00
2. 1043
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009996

    Original file (20100009996.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that he submitted a request for an SSB to address material omissions and errors in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) as it appeared before the 12 August 2008 promotion board. Any memorandum considered by a promotion board will become a matter of record to be maintained with the records of the board. It is also noted that the applicant's OER with an end date of 4 June 2007 has been identified as having one "minor negative discrepancy" (i.e., an "X"...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068521C070402

    Original file (2002068521C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: That her records be corrected to include a "complete-the-record" evaluation report. She states that Table 3-7, of Army Regulation 623-105 states that the servicing administrative office will "provide administrative data for board OERs [officer evaluation reports] by preparing a shell of [a] DA Form 67-9 [Officer Evaluation Report]." She also states, in effect, that the same regulation requires that the evaluation section of the servicing administrative office notify...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059261C070421

    Original file (2001059261C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides a letter of support from his senior rater, the Major General (now a Lieutenant General) Commander of the United States Army Maneuver Support Center and Fort Leonard Wood. The promotion board did not see the applicant’s That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected as an exception to policy, for the individual concerned, by reconsidering him for promotion selection under the FY00 Colonel Army Competitive Category (ACC) Promotion...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068526C070402

    Original file (2002068526C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was considered but not selected for promotion. The applicant was considered but not selected for promotion. On 24 January 2002, PERSCOM informed him that promotion reconsideration was authorized under Title 10, U. S. Code and approved when records contained a material error when they were considered by a promotion selection board.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091048C070212

    Original file (2003091048C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel states that the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) corrected the applicant's Officer Evaluation Report (OER); however, the Officer Special Review Board (ORSB) refused to submit his records before a SSB. In a 10 October 2002 letter to this Board, the applicant's former senior rater, Col Sh, stated that he had discussed the writing of the OER with his peers at Fort Drum and the Transportation Branch at PERSCOM, and that it was his intent to provide an OER that would support his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050010479C070206

    Original file (20050010479C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect, he was denied due course promotion to MAJ because his company command Officer Evaluation Report (OER) was not timely processed and he was not considered by the FY99 Major, Army Competitive Category, Promotion Selection Board. 99-068. e. His company command OER for the period 19980320 – 19990319, with DA Form 200 (Transmittal Record) showing the OER was shipped on 7 April 1999. f. DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated 21 September 1999. g. A 10...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008103

    Original file (20090008103.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that he believes that the Officer Special Review Board (OSRB) did not thoroughly examine his appeal. He based his appeal on his improper placement as COM in his SR's profile and the fact that another OER considered by the promotion board which had a stamp on it which stated "FY01 Promotion." As for the applicant's promotion, the only other contention made by the applicant was the fact that an OER considered by the promotion board had a stamp on it which stated "FY01...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040001657C070208

    Original file (20040001657C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The AMEDD MOI was not required to address the DAWIA for selection of AMEDD officers with an Acquisition identifier because they had not been assessed in the Acquisition Corps to be managed by the AMB. OTJAG noted that, although not required by law, the FY01 and FY02 COL, ACC promotion selection boards contained instructions to the boards to "strive to select AAC officers at a rate not less than the selection rate for all considered officers for the same competitive category." OTJAG...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040000065C070208

    Original file (20040000065C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, reconsideration for promotion to colonel (COL) by Special Selection Board (SSB). The applicant claims that the justification for her request for promotion reconsideration by a SSB is that her military record reviewed by the PSB contained one critical omission and incorrect information. On 12 March 2002, the applicant requested that her record be reviewed by a SSB due to a material error that existed at the time her record was reviewed by the promotion board.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074071C070403

    Original file (2002074071C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The FY01 Colonel Promotion Board results show that the applicant was considered above the zone (AZ) along with 97 other officers and only five officers were selected (5.1%). The PERSCOM forwarded the applicant’s request to the OSRB for a determination on the applicant’s request. While the Board understands the applicant’s perspective in this matter, he has failed to show through the evidence of record or the evidence submitted with his application, that his former spouse had any affect on...