RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        9 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040008789


      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             |
|     |Mr. Robert J. McGowan             |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Barbara J. Ellis              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Kenneth L. Wright             |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Patrick H. McGann, Jr.        |     |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 the date of his Command and General Staff
College (CGSC) 50% Completion Certificate be changed from 18 September 2003
to 2 September 2003.

2.  The applicant states he completed 50% of the non-resident CGSC course
work on/about 2 August 2003, but because of an administrative backlog, his
grades were not posted in a timely manner and he did not receive the
completion certificate until after the Fiscal Year (FY) 2003 Lieutenant
Colonel (LTC), Reserve Component/Army Promotion List (RC/APL), Promotion
Selection Board convened on 3 September 2003.

3.  The applicant provides:

      a.  A self-authored letter, dated 3 August 2004.

      b.  A copy of his CGSC 50% Completion Certificate, dated 18 September
2003.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is a US Army Reserve LTC serving on active duty in
Southwest Asia.  He was selected for promotion by the FY04 LTC, RC/APL,
Promotion Selection Board.  At the time of his submission of his
application to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR),
he was a Major.

2.  On 3 September 2003, the FY03 LTC, RC/APL, Promotion Selection Board
convened to consider USAR Majors for promotion to LTC.  The applicant was
considered by this board and was not selected.

3.  On 18 September 2003, the applicant officially completed 50% of the
non-resident CGSC course and he was so notified.

4.  Majors and Promotable Captains are eligible for enrollment in the CGSC
non-resident course.

5.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from
the Deputy Director, Non-Resident Studies, US Army Command and General
Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas concerning the posting of the
applicant's grades and the issuance of his 50% Completion Certificate.  The
applicant's
record showed he submitted his last paper for Phase I of the correspondence
course on 5 August 2003 and it was mailed to an adjunct faculty member for
grading on the same date.  The paper was received back on 17 September 2003
and the grade posted to his record on the same date.  Grades for two
additional assignments were posted on 18 September 2003 and the 50%
Completion Certificate was issued on that date.

6.  The CGSC advisory opinion references CGSC Circular 350-3 (Nonresident
Catalog), which specifically states in chapter 2, paragraph 10 "the DNRS
[Directorate of Non-Resident Studies] is under no obligation to hasten
administrative processing time [for issuing and grading examinations] . . .
and [S]tudents should keep in mind the 60 plus day turnaround time required
for grading and recording of subjective examinations [while being mindful]
to calculate additional time for rewrites."  Students are further
admonished to have "their final Phase requirements into Non-Resident
Studies at least 120 days in advance of the convening of their Promotion
Board."

7.  The applicant was provided an opportunity to respond to the CGSC
advisory opinion.  In a 7 March 2005 rebuttal, he stated, "[A]t issue is
the timing of the grading of a paper submitted by me to CGS[O]C."  He
contends it took 44 days for the school to review the paper and post a
grade for it.  He adds the paper was a resubmission, that is, it had
already been reviewed once and only required minor correction.

8.  Army Regulation (AR) 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and
Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) prescribes policy and
procedures used for selecting and promoting commissioned officers (other
than commissioned warrant officers) of the Army National Guard of the
United States (ARNGUS) and of commissioned and warrant officers (WO) of the
USAR.  It states, in pertinent part, to qualify for selection, commissioned
officers (other than commissioned warrant officers) must complete
prescribed military educational requirements not later than the day before
the selection board convene date [emphasis added].  For promotion to LTC
the requirement is completion of 50 percent of CGSC.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Officer promotion eligibility is tied to educational achievement.  AR
135-155 requires Majors to complete 50% of the non-resident CGSC not later
than the day before the LTC promotion board convenes.


2.  The applicant officially completed 50% of his non-resident CGSC course
15 days after his LTC promotion board convened.  He did not meet the
educational requirement for promotion and he was not selected.

3.  Requirements for promotion are well known.  The applicant enrolled in
the non-resident CGSC with the full knowledge that, as a Major, he needed
to complete one half of the course prior to the convening date of his LTC
promotion board.  Likewise, as a CGSC correspondence student, he was aware
there was a 60-day turn-around on grading subjective examinations, and
required re-writes could significantly increase that turn-around time.

4.  The applicant was also aware the DNRS recommended final Phase
requirements be turned-in to Non-Resident Studies at least 120 days in
advance of the convening of a Promotion Board in order to conclude all
administrative requirements and ensure issuance of the 50% Completion
Certificate by the promotion board convene date.

5.  The applicant's rebuttal to the CGSC advisory opinion is merely self-
serving rationalization.  Even if it did take 44 days from receipt of his
paper to the posting of his grade, it was well within the 60-day turn-
around cited as a benchmark in CGSC Circular 350-3.  The bottom line is the
onus is on the student to complete course work in a timely manner.  The
applicant failed to do this.

6.  There was an educational requirement for promotion to LTC; the
applicant knew of the educational requirement for promotion; he knew of the
administrative time constraints on grading examinations and issuing
certificates; he had ample time to meet the educational requirement and
satisfy the time constraints; yet he failed to comply, thereby jeopardizing
his promotion to LTC.  There is no error or injustice in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__bje___  __klw___  __phm___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of
this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the
individual concerned.



                                        Barbara J. Ellis
                                  ______________________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040008789                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050809                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |118.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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