MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 16 September 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003084415

         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. Stephanie Thompkins		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson
Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member
Ms. Karen A. Heinz		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, promotion to lieutenant colonel and reinstatement in the Reserve.

APPLICANT STATES: That his file should be reviewed to determine that, if not for the lack of 50 percent completion of the Command and General Staff Course (CGSC), he would be promoted to lieutenant colonel effective 15 January 2002 and reinstated in the Reserve. He also states that due to the requirements of his civilian employment with the Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, he was unable to dedicate the time necessary to meet the military education requirement in time for the 2000 and 2001 officer promotion boards. He believes that a review of his official file will result in a favorable consideration for promotion to lieutenant colonel. A promotion would have prevented his discharge from the Reserve on 1 September 2002. He further states that he is assigned to the Diplomatic Security Service as the Liaison Officer at Bagram Air Field, Afghanistan. In the past 10 years he has had little time to devote to his family let alone the CGSC. In support of his application he submits a memorandum of support from the Director, Karzai Protective Operation, copies of his officer evaluation reports, his military awards, his last DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), and his civilian and military education certificates.

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

He was commissioned in the Regular Army as a second lieutenant effective 17 July 1981. He was promoted to first lieutenant effective 17 January 1983.

He was released from active duty effective 16 July 1984 and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).

He was promoted to captain effective 17 January 1987 and to major effective 15 January 1994.

His available records show he received an officer evaluation report for the period ending 9 December 1996, in which the senior rater commented that the applicant should attend CGSC at the earliest opportunity.

Based on the required 7 years time in grade, his maximum time in grade date for promotion to lieutenant colonel was 14 January 2001.

He was considered and not selected for promotion to lieutenant colonel by the 2000 and 2001 Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB). He was not qualified for promotion based on the lack of the required military education.



He was discharged from the Reserve effective 1 September 2002, based on his two non-selections.

In a memorandum dated 10 December 2002, the Director, Karzai Protection Operation stated that for the period of 1996 through 1999, the applicant traveled both domestically and internationally between 70 and 75 percent of the time and was mostly assigned as a Protective Agent to the Secretary of State’s protective security detail. Special Agents are required to be on-call and available for duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week. He is aware that the applicant usually takes his regular military leave and augments it with his personal vacation time in order to meet his military obligation. When you add it all up, he sacrifices more than most.

The Chief, Special Actions Branch, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Total Army Personnel Command, expressed the opinion that the applicant was considered for promotion to lieutenant colonel by the 2000 and 2001 RCSB’s and not recommended because he has not completed 50 percent of the CGSC. An officer cannot be recommended for promotion or promoted without the required education. He has not completed the military education; therefore, he has no basis for consideration by a special selection board. Based on this information, he recommended the application be denied.

The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for acknowledgement/
rebuttal on 28 April 2003. He did not respond.

Army Regulation 135-155 prescribes the policies and procedures for promotion of Reserve officers. This regulation specifies that in order to be promoted to lieutenant colonel an individual must have completed 7 years of time in grade as a major and 50 percent of the CGSC on before the convening date of the respective promotion board. Upon a non-selection by a promotion board an individual's promotion eligibility date (PED) will be adjusted by 1 year, accordingly; and that individuals will receive mandatory promotion consideration prior to their PED's so that, if selected, they may be promoted on their future PED.

The regulation also specifies that individuals twice not selected for promotion to lieutenant colonel will be transferred to the Retired Reserve if they are eligible and request such transfer, or discharged.







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. In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to promotion to lieutenant colonel and reinstatement in the Reserve. He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.

2. The board has noted his contentions that his civilian employment and his inability to dedicate the time necessary to meet the military education requirement for completing 50 percent of the CGSC; however, he was advised as early as 1996 that he needed to attend at his earliest opportunity. The applicant, by his own admission states, that in 1996 his civilian employment and duties rendered him unable to complete the military education requirement. While the board is empathetic and commends the applicant on his service to the Department of State promotion to lieutenant colonel requires 50 percent completion of the CGSC.

3. It is also noted that the applicant had not completed 50 percent of the CGSC. He was fairly considered twice for promotion to lieutenant colonel and not selected. He was not educationally qualified for promotion.

4. Implicit in the Army's promotion system is the universally accepted and frequently discussed principle that officers have a responsibility for their own careers. The general requirements and workings of the system are widely known and specific details such as RCSB dates and promotion zones are widely published in official, quasi-official and unofficial publications, and in official communications. Given that the applicant became a major in January 1994 and that he had to be considered by a RCSB so that, if selected, he could be promoted by the time he had served 7 years in grade, the applicant knew, or should have known, that he would be considered by an RCSB as early as 2000 and that he needed to insure, well in advance, that his record would present his career and qualifications to that board in the best possible light.

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 error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________ ________ ________ GRANT

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_FNE____ __KAH___ _MMH__ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003084415
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	20030916
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	131.00
2.	131.01
3.
4.
5.
6.