IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	       12 March 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080014839 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his military records to add a Complete-the-Record (Code 09) Officer Evaluation Report (OER) to his official military personnel file (OMPF) and to have his records considered by a Department of the Army Special Selection Board (SSB) for promotion to chief warrant officer five (CW5).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his promotion file for CW5 did not contain his last OER for the period from 23 April 2007 through 15 March 2008.  He contends that the OER was completed and ready for signature in February 2008; however, the OER remained unsigned until 19 March 2008.  He had hand-carried the OER to both the company commander and battalion commander, and then delivered it to the battalion S-1 [personnel office].  He was assured that the OER would be sent that same day.  He then waited until 26 March 2008 to allow time for the OER to be processed.  The battalion S-1 assured him that the OER was at Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA), but when he spoke with personnel at HQDA he was told that it had not been received.  On 22 May 2008, the applicant was informed by his battalion S-1 that the memorandum of instruction (MOI) contained incorrect addresses and that the OER had not been received at HQDA until 17 May 2008.

3.  The applicant provides, in support of his application, copies of the subject OER and the Military Personnel (MILPER) Message Number 08-012, Fiscal Year 2008 Reserve Component Chief Warrant Officer Five Competitive Categories Promotion Selection Boards Zones of Consideration.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  At the time of his application, the applicant was a chief warrant officer four, pay grade W-4, serving in the Active Guard Reserve Program.

2.  The subject OER shows the following:

	a.  The period of the report was from 23 April 2007 to 15 March 2008.

	b.  The type of report was a Complete-the-Record.

	c.  The rater signed the report on 17 March 2008.  The senior rater and the applicant signed the report on 19 March 2008.

	d.  The evaluation shows that the applicant's performance of duty was outstanding and that he was the best qualified for promotion.  He was rated above the center of mass.

	e.  The senior rater's profile date was 14 May 2008.

3.  MILPER Message Number 08-012, issued 10 January 2008, provided at paragraph 4c(2) that Complete-the-Record OER's were to have a "Thru Date" of 4 January 2008 to have a senior rater profile.  Paragraph 4a of this message stated that all mandatory and optional OER's must be received, error free, in the Evaluation Branch, Human Resources Command, Alexandria, Virginia, not later than the close of business on 4 April 2008.

4.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Special Actions Branch, Department of the Army Promotions, United States Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri.  The opinion stated that the applicant's Complete-the-Record OER has a thru date of 15 March 2008; therefore, it was not in compliance with the criteria governing Complete-the-Record reports.  Furthermore, the senior rater's date of profile on the subject OER is 14 May 2008.  The cutoff date established in the MILPER message for Complete-the-Record OER's was 4 January 2008.  Complete-the-Record OER's must follow the established guidelines outlined in the MILPER message.  Therefore, the opinion recommended that the applicant's request be disapproved.

5.  On 15 January 2009, the applicant responded to the advisory opinion.  He acknowledged that the MILPER message established a cutoff date of 4 January 2008 for Complete-the-Record OER's and that those OER's had to be received in the Evaluation Branch no later than the close of business on 4 April 2008.  However, he contends that because the MILPER message was not issued until 10 January 2008, the rating officials did not have the ability to render an evaluation and submit it by 4 April 2008.  He further contends that the 4 April 2008 date should have been used as the cutoff for receipt of all optional OER's.  The applicant further argues that his request for standby reconsideration is based on the material error that his OER dated 15 March 2008 did not reach the Evaluation Branch prior to the 4 April 2008 cutoff.

6.  Army Regulation 623-3 (Evaluation Reporting System), paragraph 3-60, provides that Complete-the-Record reports are optional.  Therefore, the absence of such reports from the OMPF at the time of the board's review will not be a basis to request standby consideration unless the absence is due to administrative error or a delay in processing at HQDA.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that because the Complete-the-Record OER was received late and thus not considered by the promotion selection board, he should receive reconsideration for promotion selection to CW5.

2.  The evidence clearly shows that a Complete-the-Record OER was rendered on the applicant with an ending date of 15 March 2008.  The cutoff for such reports was not later than 4 January 2008.  Furthermore, the senior rater's profile was dated 14 May 2008, which exceeded the established date of 4 April 2008.  Therefore, this OER did not qualify for consideration by the promotion selection board.

3.  The MILPER message governing the submission of OER's for the subject promotion board established a cutoff of 4 January 2008 for receipt of Complete-the-Record OER's.  Even though the implementing message was issued 6 days later on 10 January 2008, the rating officials still had sufficient time to render these OER's and process them to HQDA by the cutoff of 4 April 2008.

4.  The governing regulation clearly states that the absence of the subject OER does not constitute a basis for convening an SSB.

5.  In view of the above, the applicant's request should be denied.



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X____  ____X___  ____X___  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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      __________X______________
                 CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080014839



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080014839



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1