RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  13 May 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070014143 


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Mr. Jessie B. Strickland

Analyst

      The following members, a quorum, were present:


M

Chairperson

M

Member

M

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 that she be granted an educational waiver for promotion consideration to the rank of chief warrant officer four (CW4) and promotion reconsideration by a special selection board (SSB) for the 2007 CW4 selection board. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she had completed all of the pre-requisite computer-based courses and was scheduled to attend the warrant officer advanced course in July 2006; however, she was involuntarily deployed to Iraq.  She goes on to state that she requested a delay to deploy to allow her to attend the course and her request was denied.  Consequently, she was nonselected for promotion to the rank of CW4.  

3.  The applicant provides a copy of her letter of nonselection for promotion and a copy of her appeal of her nonselection. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was born on 29 April 1960 and enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) in Los Angeles, California on 16 June 1982.  She completed her training and remained in an active status through a series of continuous reenlistments.  She was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 1 August 1991 in the military occupational specialty of a court reporter.  

2.  On 2 December 1994, she was appointed as a USAR Warrant Officer One (WO1) in the Judge Advocate General’s (JAG) Corps and was assigned to a Legal Support Organization in Los Alamitos, California.  She was promoted to the rank of chief warrant officer two (CW2) on 3 December 1996 and to the rank of chief warrant officer three (CW3) on 3 December 2002.  

3.  On 19 March 2003, the applicant was issued her Notification of Eligibility to Receive Retired Pay at Age 60 (20-year letter).   

4.  The applicant was scheduled to attend the JAG Warrant Officer Advanced Course (WOAC) in July 2005 and just prior to the class she cancelled her attendance due to work conflict.  She was subsequently rescheduled to attend the July 2006 class.   

5.  However, 23 May 2006, orders were issued to involuntarily order her to active duty in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.  The applicant requested that her deployment be delayed in order to attend the WOAC and her request was denied.  On 28 July 2006, the applicant was ordered to active duty at Fort Hood, Texas.  She deployed to Kuwait and Iraq on 3 September 2006 with the 13th Sustainment Command.

6.  On 31 July 2007, a notification was dispatched to the applicant informing her that she was considered and nonselected for promotion to the rank of CW4.  It also informed her that her records did not indicate that she had completed the required education before the convening date of the promotion selection board.  

7.  The applicant remained in theater until 2 August 2007, when she was returned to Fort Hood to undergo demobilization.

8.  On 12 October 2007, the applicant was honorably released from active duty due to completion of required service and was returned to her troop program unit in Los Alamitos.  

9.  Information obtained from the Army Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School website indicates that the JAG Warrant Officer Advanced Course is a  4-week course that is conducted once a year and is usually conducted beginning in the month of July, in Charlottesville, Virginia.

10.  Information obtained from the Army On Line (AOL) website indicates that the USAR Promotion Selection Board for promotion to CW4 is usually convened in mid-April.  The 2007 board convened on 18 April 2007 and the 2008 board convened on 15 April 2008.

11.  Information obtained from the WOAC Director at the JAG School indicates that the July 2008 class currently has only 20 seats filled and that the applicant would be able to attend the next class if she applied.

12.  Information obtained from the Warrant Officer Management Office at Human Resources Command – St. Louis indicates that the applicant’s command requested a seat reservation for the next WOAC for the applicant and that the Warrant Officer Management Office has requested an allocation for the applicant to attend the July 2008 WOAC.

13.  In the processing of this case a staff member of the Board contacted the applicant in regards to her application and to ascertain her intentions of attending the July 2008 WOAC.  The applicant responded to the effect that she had already made the request to attend and had cleared her schedule for the July 2008 class.  When queried as to why she had not requested a waiver of education requirements for either of the selection boards, the applicant responded that she was unaware that she could do so.  She also stated that she had successfully completed her 3,000 hour certification.

14.  In the processing of this case a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Human Resources Command – St. Louis (HRC-STL) Special Actions Branch which opines, in effect, that the applicant had 6 years to attend the WOAC and did not do so and therefore her request should be denied.  The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for response and she responded to the effect that she is a devoted wife, active mother of four, a full-time employee and active Reservist who is involved in an internist program related to her civilian education which left her little time to attend the WOAC.  However, she was scheduled to attend in July 2006 when she was involuntarily deployed.  

15.  Army Regulation 135-155 provides policy and procedures for the selection and promotion of commissioned officers of the Army National Guard and the United States Army Reserve (USAR).  Chapter 2 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that in order for officers to qualify for selection, they must complete the educational requirements for promotion no later than the date the selection board convenes.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Notwithstanding the HRC-STL opinion that the applicant had 6 years to complete the WOAC, the applicant was scheduled to attend the July 2006 WOAC and was involuntarily deployed to Iraq after requesting a delay to attend the WOAC before being deployed.  While deployed, she was nonselected for promotion the first time in April 2007.    

2.  The applicant remained deployed through 12 October 2007, which caused her to miss the next WOAC held in July 2007 and will likely result in her being twice nonselected before she will have the opportunity again to attend the WOAC.  

3.  Therefore, since the Army did not want to delay her deployment for 4 weeks in order for her to attend the course she was scheduled to attend and since the deployment put her into a position to be possibly twice nonselected for promotion before she could attend the WOAC, it would be in the interest of justice that she be granted an educational waiver for promotion board purposes only. 

4.  While it is understood that the applicant had 6 years to attend the WOAC, it is also understood that she was properly enrolled in the course and would in all likelihood have completed the course well before she was considered for promotion had she not been involuntarily deployed.  The involuntary deployment was not an action/event that she could have predicted; however, the Department had the ability to ensure that the applicant was afforded the opportunity to attend the course before she was twice non-selected and did not do so.

5.  It is not the Department’s intent that deployments, whether they be voluntary or involuntary serve to disadvantage any of our Soldiers; however, when instances occur that cause a Soldier to be disadvantaged in the course of doing their duty, it is incumbent on the Department to do all that can be done to right the error or injustice that resulted.  The applicant has been a dedicated professional in the USAR for over 25 years and to grant relief in this case is a small price to pay for her dedication and service.    

6.  Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice that the applicant be granted an educational waiver for promotion board purposes and that her records be placed before a special selection board for all boards that reviewed her records without an educational waiver and nonselected her for promotion to the rank of CW4.     

BOARD VOTE:

__XXX __  __XXX__  __XXX__   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 showing that she is granted an educational waiver for promotion board purposes and that her records be placed before a special selection board for all boards that reviewed her records without an education waiver and did not select her for promotion to the rank of CW4.



      ___        XXX                ___
                CHAIRPERSON
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20070014143



5


DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
1901 SOUTH BELL STREET, 2ND FLOOR
ARLINGTON, VA  22202-4508