RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060014858 


	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. Gerard W. Schwartz

Acting Director

Mrs. Victoria A. Donaldson

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Linda D. Simmons

Chairperson

Mr. Jerome L. Pionk

Member

Mr. Eddie L. Smoot

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 reconsideration of his previous request for consideration by a Selective Continuation Board (SELCON).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that there was no information readily available for submission of an educational waiver, procedures for requesting appearance before a SECON, and the office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army Manpower and Reserve Affairs (ASA M&RA) did not provide guidance on how to proceed to avoid separation from the Army.

3.  The applicant provides a letter of explanation, copies of previous appeals and attachments, a letter to ASA M&RA with enclosures, and an information paper on SELCON.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20050001784, on 17 November 2005.

2.  The applicant did not provide any new evidence for consideration with this case, however, the applicant argues that he was not aware of the procedures for requesting an education waiver prior to his nonselection for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by two Department of the Army Mandatory Promotion Boards.

3.  The applicant did not successfully complete 50 percent of the Command and General Staff Officer Course prior to consideration by two Department of the Army Mandatory Promotion Boards.  As a result, he was found to be not educationally qualified and was not among those officers selected.

4.  As a result of his twice failing selection for promotion to lieutenant colonel, the applicant was discharged on 1 August 2004.

5.  Records do not show that the applicant completed 50 percent of the Command and General Staff Officer Course prior to his discharge.  There is no evidence that the applicant requested an education waiver prior to his 1 August 2004 discharge.

6.  The applicant's records show that, on 24 March 2004, he requested that the ASA M&RA retain him in the United States Army Reserve (USAR).  There is no evidence in the available records which show that the ASA M&RA authorized the applicant's retention in the USAR.

7.  The applicant again provided the guidance on SELCON board and requested consideration by a SELCON board.  There is no evidence that the applicant requested consideration or was considered by a SELCON board prior to his discharge for twice failing selection for the grade of lieutenant colonel.

8.  The applicant provided a four-page letter of explanation for consideration with this application.  The applicant contends that he desires to continue to serve as a member of the USAR and that the total Army can make use of every motivated Soldier that it can retain.  The applicant argues that the procedures surrounding SELCON boards are not wisely used or known because they are specific to only a limited set of circumstances.

9.  The applicant continues that based on his service, he did not have a regular relationship with a servicing personnel center and that his branch management team were unable to provide him timely guidance on the SELCON procedures.  The applicant further argues that he was not prevented from obtaining the necessary information but was not able to become informed of the information in a timely manner. 

10.  The applicant concludes that the injustice or inequity in his case remains that through a combination of circumstances, he was unable to acquire timely information regarding the procedures with regard to SELCON applications and still desires to serve as a member of the USAR.

11.  Army Regulation 135–155, prescribes the policies and procedures for the promotion of Reserve Components officers.  This regulation specifies that officers in the grade of major who have failed selection for promotion to lieutenant colonel a second time will be removed from active status, unless subsequently placed on a promotion list, selected for continuation, or retained in the Ready Reserve with 18 or more but less than 20 qualifying years of service for retired pay.

12.  Army Regulation 135-155, also specifics that, subject to the needs of the Army, officers pending separation because of having twice failed to be selected for promotion to lieutenant colonel, may be selectively continued on the Reserve Active Status List in their present grade.  The Secretary of the Army (SA) may direct a SELCON board to consider officers for continuation when required by the needs of the Reserve of the Army.  A SELCON board must recommend officers for continuation and the SA must approve the recommendation before officers may be continued for 3 years from the approval date of the SELCON board.  The SA may adjust the period of selective continuation.  An officer not selected by a SELCON board will be discharged.

13.  Army Regulation 135-155, also specifies that the Commander, HRC, Office of Promotion, may administratively delete a name from a mandatory promotion board report before Presidential approval.  The board report becomes a promotion list after being approved by the President or his designee.  If an officer is determined to be ineligible for consideration because the officer was not in an active status or was in an active status in error at the time of consideration, the Commander, HRC, Office of Promotions, will verify the officer's ineligibility and request removal or administrative deletion of the officer's name from the approved promotion list.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that he was not aware of the procedures for applying for an education waiver or a SELCON was carefully considered and determined to be without merit.

2.  Evidence shows that the applicant has failed to complete 50 percent of the Command and General Staff Officer Course prior to his consideration by two Department of the Army Mandatory Promotion Boards.  After the first nonselection for promotion the applicant was notified of the fact that he failed selection based on failure to meet the education requirements.  The applicant did not complete the required education prior to the second board nor did he request a waiver prior to the convening date of the second board.  The applicant's failure to take action and his claim that he was not aware of the procedures to request an education waiver does not mitigate the fact that he failed to meet the minimum education requirement prior to the convening date of the second promotion consideration board.

3.  There is no evidence in the available record and the applicant has provided insufficient evidence which shows that his discharge based on twice failure of selection for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel was improper or otherwise flawed.




4.  The applicant further contends that he should have been considered by a SELCON Board for continuation in the USAR.  There is no evidence in the available records and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence which shows that the ASA M&RA authorized his retention in the USAR.  Additionally, as stated in the previous case the Secretary of the Army did not authorize SELCON Boards for majors considered by the 2002 and 2003 Reserve Component Selection Board.  Therefore, consideration by a SELCON board for the 2002 and 2003 criteria is a moot point.

5.  Absent evidence to the contrary, the applicant's failure to understand the procedures for requesting an education waiver and/or consideration by a SELCON, does not mitigate the fact that he did not meet the minimum education requirements for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel and as a result was twice nonselected for promotion.

6.  Based on the foregoing, there is no basis to grant the relief requested in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_LDS____  _JLP____  _ELS___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20050001784, dated 17 November 2005.




_Linda D. Simmons_____
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
YYYYMMDD
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.