IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 11 December 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080017537
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 official military personnel file (OMPF) by removal of an erroneous award that is not his. He also requests that his records be submitted to a Special Selection Board (SSB) for promotion consideration for colonel, pay grade O-6.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that there was an award in his OMPF that was not his and that even though he made this error known, his OMPF went before the promotion board and contained this erroneous award. He further contends that the presence of this erroneous award caused his non-selection for promotion to colonel. He also contends that he believes he was discriminated against because of his basic branch, in that no chemical officers were selected for promotion.
3. The applicant states that a copy of the erroneous award is attached. However, it was not received with the application. The only document that was received with the application was a copy of a letter from the Chief, Office of Promotions, United States Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri dated 10 July 2008.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. At the time of his application, the applicant was a lieutenant colonel serving on active duty as an Active Guard/Reserve officer.
2. In May 1999, the applicant received an Army Commendation Medal. When the certificate for his award was posted to the Performance Section of his OMPF, a certificate awarding the Joint Service Commendation Medal (JSCM) to another individual was also posted to his file. The JSCM is still filed in the Performance Section of the applicants OPMF.
3. The applicant was promoted to lieutenant colonel with a date of rank of
26 January 2004.
4. On 10 July 2008, the Chief, Office of Promotions, United States Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri, wrote to the applicant informing him that when his records were considered by the Fiscal Year 2008 Department of the Army Reserve Components Colonel Selection Board, they inadvertently included a commendatory document that belongs to another Soldier. In accordance with Army Regulation 135-155 [Officer Promotions], paragraph 3-19, if another persons adverse document was seen by the promotion board, the officer that was considered for promotion will have a basis for special board consideration. Since the document [in question] was commendatory and not adverse, the applicant was denied reconsideration by an SSB. The applicant was advised in this letter that he may request consideration of this issue by this Board.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The evidence clearly shows the applicants OMPF contains an award of the JSCM that belongs to another Soldier. Therefore, it should be removed from his OMPF.
2. The applicants contention that he was not selected for promotion to colonel because an erroneous award was filed in his OMPF is not substantiated by any evidence of record. Furthermore, regulatory guidance does not provide for reconsideration by an SSB when commendatory documents are incorrectly filed in a Soldiers OMPF and are inadvertently seen by a promotion board.
3. The applicant provided neither substantiating evidence or convincing argument showing that the non-selection of any chemical officers for promotion was discriminatory towards him.
4. In view of the above, the applicants records should be corrected by removing the JSCM that belongs to another Soldier. However, there is no basis for submitting his records for consideration by an SSB.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
____X___ ____X___ ___X____ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by removing from the applicants Performance Section of his OMPF the JSCM that belongs to another Soldier.
2. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to consideration of the applicants record by a SSB for promotion to colonel.
________ _ _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) AR20070016793
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080015737
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00501
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPO agrees the JSCM citation not belonging to the applicant and the BDR identifying the “missing” JSCM should be removed from his OSR. However, since OPRs on extended active duty officers are due at HQ AFPC no later than 60 days following the report’s closeout date, the 31 May 03 OPR was not required to be on file until 31 Jul 03, after the CY03A board convened. The Air Force recommends these...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015219
The applicant requests, in effect, consideration for promotion to colonel (COL) by a Special Selection Board (SSB). The applicant states, in effect, that there were material errors in his record in the form of three missing Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs) and missing awards and recognition for his service during Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) when he was considered for promotion by the 2007 COL Army Medical Department (AMEDD) Colonel Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB). On 3 January...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012231
The applicant states the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel (DCSPER) memorandum, dated 24 January 2002, that denied his appeal of two Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs) is derogatory information and was erroneously filed in the performance section of his official military files (OMPF). He states he believes his non-selection for promotion to colonel was due to the OER appeal correspondence being filed in the performance section of his OMPF. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019495
Counsel requests: a. removal of the Officer Evaluation Report (OER) for the period 1 July 2008 through 30 November 2008 (hereafter referred to as the referred OER) from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF); and b. restoration of all pay, allowances, entitlements, rights, and privileges, which were affected by the referred OER and led to his discharge from the U.S. Army on 1 November 2011 (in effect, reinstatement of his commission that was lost when he was discharged from the Regular...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008881
On 6 August 2009, the DASEB determined the GOMOR was filed in error and granted the applicant the following relief: a. removal of the GOMOR, dated August 2002, from the applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The DASEB determined that based on the effective date of the filing (i.e., 2 April 2007) of the GOMOR in the appellant's OMPF, the (2006) promotion selection board did not view the GOMOR. Therefore, the applicant's records should be considered by an SSB under the FY06 COL...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00054
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2007-00054 INDEX CODE: 100.05 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: UNKNOWN MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 July 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be considered by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 2006A (CY06A) (15 May 2006) (P0606A) Colonel (Col) Central Selection Board (CSB)...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014513
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 October 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080014513 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests removal of an erroneous enlistment contract from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by removing the DD Form 4, dated 14 March 1991, from his OMPF.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080002858
The memorandum emphasized that the new board would evaluate the applicant's official Department of the Army file and judge his military record as compared with the records of the officers in the new zone of consideration. Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers - Army National Guard and United States Army Reserve) states, in pertinent part, that an officer who twice fails to be selected for promotion to captain, major, or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004151C071029
Paragraph 3-19 of the promotions regulation also contains the following list of factors that will normally result in a material error determination: (1) Officer is removed from a selection list after the next selection board considering the officers of his or her grade recesses. It states that a promotion reconsideration board will consider the record of the officer as it should have been considered by the original board. The applicant’s contention that he should be reconsidered for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016564
He concludes that a material error occurred in that his complete record was not available or properly submitted to the promotion board and that the board was unable to consider his evaluation reports and his civilian education records and that he should be entitled to a Special Selection Board (SSB). The memorandum also notified him that one of the many possible reasons for the non-selection may have been that his record, when reviewed by the board, did not reveal that he had completed the...