RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          4 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040007672


      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.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Rosa M. Chandler              |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Mark D. Manning               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Larry C. Bergquist            |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carmen Duncan                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that the DA Form 1059-2 (Senior
Service College Academic Evaluation Report (AER) that he received while
attending the United States (US) Army War College Distance Education Course
(AWCDEC)
be expunged from his official military personnel file (OMPF) and that he be
granted a waiver and recycled into the next available resident course or
AWCDEC.

2.  The applicant states that as a result of the deferment process, he was
denied a fair and timely consideration of his request for deferment.  It
took the US Army Reserve Personnel Command (ARPERSCOM) St. Louis, Missouri
7 months to officially disapprove his initial request for deferment and an
additional 2 months to notify him that it was too late to process a request
after being convinced that he had a valid reason for deferment.  He prefers
to attend the residential course; however he is available to attend either
course immediately.

3.  In a memorandum written to the Board, the applicant states, in effect,
that:


      a.  ARPERSCOM failed to timely notify him that his request for
deferment had been denied resulting in the Army War College (AWC)
involuntarily disenrolling him due to a lack of academic progress.

      b.  On 19 August 2002, he submitted his initial request for a
deferment to attend the AWCDEC.  On 10 January 2003, the staff at the AWC
advised him that his request for deferment had been denied.  On 19 March
2003 ARPERSCOM advised him that this request for a deferment had been
denied.

      c.  It also took ARPERSCOM 1 year to advise him that the AER that he
had been issued would be a permanent part of his OMPF.  During the
deferment process he received mixed messages from the AWCDEC staff,
ARPERSCOM and the AWC Student Catalogue.

      d.  On 24 March 2003, the ARPERSCOM staff advised the applicant to
submit an e-mail clearly outlining explicitly why he submitted the request
for deferment.  In March 2003, he was also advised that, if his request for
deferment was disapproved, a Board of Review would meet in May 2003 to
determine his status.  He was led to believe that everything could be
corrected, even after his request had been denied.
e.  On 28 March 2003, he submitted a second request for deferment.  On
3 April 2003, he was advised to submit additional information and to revise
his request for deferment.  He made the necessary revisions and provided
the information and he was led to believe his request met the criteria for
approval. On 15 April 2003, he received a letter from the AWC, dated 3
April 2003, indicating the Board of Review had met on this date and he had
been involuntarily disenrolled from the AWCDEC.


      f.  On 20 April 2003, he requested a stay of the AER and that he be
given the opportunity to voluntarily disenroll.


      g.  On 23 May 2003, he requested that ARPERSCOM nullify his AER based
on his request for a deferment.  He was advised that the decision was
final.

      h.  On 7 July 2003, he was advised that his DA Form 1059-2 had been
placed in his permanent record.

      i.  On 1 August 2003, his father passed away after a long struggle
with Parkinson's disease and other illnesses.  His father's illness was his
primary reason for requesting a deferment and the reason that he was unable
to maintain academic progress.  He is postured to pursue the AWCDEC.


      j.  On 2 April 2004, the applicant submitted a third request for
deferment and the request was never acted on, due to the fact that he had
already been involuntarily disenrolled from the AWCDEC.

4.  The applicant provides in support of his request:

      a.  Memoranda, Headquarters 7th Battalion (Quartermaster),
4th Brigade (CCS), 100th Division, Gunter Annex, Alabama, dated 28 March
2003, and 2 April 2003.

      b.  Memoranda, US AWC and Carlisle Barracks, Carlisle, Pennsylvania,
dated 15 April and 15 July 2003.


      c.  AER and supporting document.


      d.  Page 29 from the AWC Catalogue.


      e.  Memorandum, ARPERCOM, St. Louis Missouri, dated 19 March 2003.


      f.  Memorandum, Headquarters, 1st Brigade, 87th Division, Birmingham,
Alabama, dated 19 August 2002.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is a lieutenant colonel (Quartermaster).  At the time
this application was filed he was serving as a battalion commander in an
Active Reserve Transient Personnel Unit, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama.

2.  The applicant applied for and was approved to attend the AWCDEC
scheduled to start in June 2002.  On 19 August 2002, he submitted a request
for deferment.  He stated that "due to personal and professional reasons,
he was unable to meet the due dates in the schedule for submitting
requirements and that he could not maintain adequate progress in the
course.  The major impact of his setback was his civilian and reserve
duties.  The start of the course corresponded with the busiest time of the
year for both jobs."  He also stated that he was enjoying the course
material and the curriculum.  The training was useful in both his military
and civilian roles and that he would be better prepared to attend the next
class, if granted a deferment.

3.  On 18 March 2003, the applicant acknowledged in an e-mail written to an
ARPERSCOM staff member that he had been unofficially advised that his
request for deferment had been disapproved because it was not detailed and
strongly written.  The ARPERSCOM staff member suggested that the applicant
send an e-mail clearly outlining explicitly why he requested a deferment.

4.  A memorandum, dated 19 March 2003, shows that ARPERSCOM advised the
applicant in writing that his request for deferment had been disapproved.

5.  On 28 March 2003, in a memorandum format, the applicant submitted a
revised request for deferment stating that he misunderstood the initial
guidance.  He stated that he was enrolled in the AWCDEC that began in June
2002 and that he failed to discuss the specific aspects of his personal
reasons for requesting a deferment, because he misunderstood the process.
He indicated that his father was 80 years of age and suffered from
Parkinson's disease, heart trouble, high blood pressure and many other
illnesses.  Between January and November 2002, he was required to drive or
fly from Alabama to Baltimore, Maryland at least once a month to handle a
variety of issues for his parents.  His father was very ill and too much
for his mother to handle alone, but she was committed to caring for him.
However, at the time that his request for deferment was submitted, some
mechanisms had been put in place to help resolve the situation with his
father's care.  His personal circumstances had been a strain on him, his
family, and on both his military and civilian careers.
6.  The applicant also stated that he worked in the school system as a
chief financial officer and that June was the busiest time of year for
administrators.  This coupled with being selected to command a battalion
had hampered his ability to meet course requirements.  Therefore, he
requested a deferment without understanding the extent to which he was
required to explain his circumstances.  He also stated that he has the
support of family and excellent time management skills and that he knows he
can stay on track.

7.  On 3 April 2003, the AWC issued the applicant an AER for the period
from
1 July to 19 December 2002 which shows he did not successfully complete the
AWCDEC and that he was involuntarily disenrolled from the course, due to a
lack of academic progress.

8.  E-mail that the applicant provided shows that members of the ARPERSCOM
staff were unaware that he had been disenrolled form the AWCDEC on the
above date and continued to support and work with him in revising his
request for deferment to make it stronger.

9.  On 20 April 2003, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the AER.  He
also submitted a handwritten statement in which he requested a stay on the
AER and the opportunity to voluntarily disenroll from the course, based on
a pending appeal at ARPERSCOM.  He also stated that ARPERSCOM would not
consider his appeal, if he had been issued an AER.

10.  In May 2003, the ARPERSCOM staff realized the applicant had been
disenrolled from the AWCDEC and advised him that they could no longer help
him because the decision was final.

11.  On 15 July 2003, the Dean of Academics, AWC responded to the
applicant’s request by stating that his record had been carefully reviewed
and that his circumstances had been discussed with ARPERSCOM.  His record
showed that he had been properly counseled in regard to his options and
appropriately informed of the Academic Review Board and its potential
consequences.  The dean also stated that the additional material the
applicant provided by e-mail on 14 July 2003 had also been reviewed and
that it was not sufficient to change the policy requirements.  Both the
results of the Academic Review Board and the AER were valid.  He was
advised that ARPERSCOM had the authority to review an appeal.
12.  Army Regulation 350-1 (Army Training and Education) is a consolidation
of several regulations that provide policy and guidance concerning Army
training and education.  This regulation provides new guidance concerning
the Army School System, Army modernization training, Soldier, civilian and
leader training education programs.  Paragraph 3-20 provides that Soldiers
and civilian employees selected to attend courses will attend the class for
which selected, unless deferred by the selection system.  There are three
categories of deferment:  compassionate, medical, and operational.
Deferment for compassionate reasons will be reviewed to determine if they
meet the compassionate assignment criteria.  Deferment for medical reasons
may be requested when the individual's physical condition will not allow
full participation in the selected course.  Operational deferment will only
be granted for unit deployments.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The available evidence supports that the applicant submitted a request
for deferment to attend the AWCDEC in August 2002.  He was advised that his
request had been denied on 19 March 2003 and he was involuntarily
disenrolled from the course, due to a lack of academic progress on 3 April
2003.

2.  Even though the deferment process appears to have been convoluted it
was the applicant's responsibility to continue to submit course work until
the request was approved.  However, given the information, the applicant
has provided it is reasonable to believe that he applied to attend the
AWCDEC before he was required to spend so much time helping his parents and
before he assumed command.  It is also reasonable to believe that, in good
faith, he attempted to fulfill all of his obligations to include the AWCDEC
until he became overwhelmed and realized he could not meet all of his
requirements.

3.  Additionally, it is also logical to believe the applicant may have been
provided a compassionate deferment had he, initially, provided ARPERCOM the
information concerning his circumstances as they are stated in his revised
request.

4.  It would be appropriate to expunge or remove from the applicant's OMPF
the AER he was issued on 3 April 2003 and grant him a waiver to attend the
next available AWCDEC.

BOARD VOTE:

__mdm___  __lcb___  __cd____  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all
Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by
removing from the applicant's OMPF the AER he was issued on 3 April 2003
and granting him a waiver to attend the next available AWCDEC.



                 Mark D. Manning
            ______________________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040007672                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051004                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |(GRANT)                                 |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.0700                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]