Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019264
Original file (20080019264.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	        11 JUNE 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080019264 


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, that she be reconsidered for promotion to Chief Warrant Officer Five (CW5) by a Special Selection Board (SSB).   

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that as a result of the incorrect coding of her records, she was not considered for promotion by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2008 CW5 Reserve Component Selection Board (RCSB).  

3.  The applicant provides additional documentary evidence with her application. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's record shows after serving in the Army National Guard (ARNG) and United States Army Reserve (USAR) in an enlisted status, she was appointed a Reserve warrant officer, in the rank of Chief Warrant Officer Two (CW2), on 6 March 1991.  She was promoted to Chief Warrant Officer Three (CW3) on 12 March 2000, and to CW4 on 6 March 2003.

2.  During the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the U. S. Army Human Resources Command-St. Louis (HRC-STL), Chief, Special Actions Branch, Department of the Army (DA) Promotions.  This official confirms the applicant was omitted from consideration for promotion to CW5 by the FY 2008 CW5 RCSB and as a result, her request for promotion consideration by a SSB should be approved.  The applicant concurred with this advisory opinion on  23 February 2009.  

3.  Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers), in pertinent part, contains guidance on managing SSBs.  It states, in pertinent part, that SSBs may be convened to consider or reconsider commissioned or warrant officers for promotion when Headquarters, Department of the Army discovers an officer was not considered from in or above the promotion zone by a regularly scheduled board because of administrative error.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that she should be considered for promotion to CW5 by an SSB was carefully considered and found to have merit.  

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant was omitted from consideration by the FY 2008 CW5 RCSB due to an administrative error, as confirmed in the HRC-STL advisory opinion.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to have the applicant's record placed before an SSB for consideration for promotion under the criteria of the FY2008 CW5 RCSB.  

3.  Further, if she is selected, her promotion effective date and date of rank should be assigned as if she had been originally selected under the earlier criteria identified by the SSB, and she should be provided all back pay and allowances due as a result. 

BOARD VOTE:

___X_____  ____X____  ____X____  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:

	a.  submitting her records to a duly constituted SSB for promotion consideration to Chief Warrant Officer Five under the criteria followed by the Fiscal Year 2008 DA CW5 RCSB; 

	b.  If she is selected for promotion by the SSB, her records should be corrected by establishing her CW5 promotion effective date and date of rank as if she had been originally selected under the earlier criteria identified by the SSB and by providing her all back pay and allowances due as a result; and 

	c.  If she is not selected for promotion by the SSB, she should be so notified by Human Resources Command, St. Louis promotion officials.  




      _______ _   _XXX______   ___
       	   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)                                         AR20080019264



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080019264



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011090

    Original file (20090011090.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, while there is no basis upon which to authorize an adjustment of the applicant’s DOR at this time, the evidence of record confirms the applicant was erroneously omitted from promotion consideration by the FY 1994, 1995, and 1996 RCSBs, as confirmed in the HRC-St. Louis advisory opinion. If the SSB selects the applicant for promotion to CPT under an earlier criteria, her CPT promotion effective date and DOR should be adjusted accordingly. As a result, the Board recommends that all...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018748

    Original file (20070018748.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states “I was not considered for selection to CW5 as a 420A Military Personnel Technician, although 420A is my primary MOS and I was in the promotion zone of consideration. On 1 April 2008, the Warrant Officer Branch, USAHRC-STL, confirmed to the Board analyst that the applicant's primary MOS is 420A and his additional MOS is 270A. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of record shows that the applicant was not considered for promotion to CW5 based on the information that he...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010259

    Original file (20090010259.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He indicates he took the advisory opinion to the PAARNG and therefore, he provided Orders 352-1001 placing him in the USAR effective 12 October 2008, which is before the convening date of the November 2008 board. Based on the HRC-STL advisory opinion, as an Army National Guard officer the applicant was not in the zone for consideration for promotion to captain by the FY 2009 board and the applicant's request to HRC-STL for an SSB was denied. If he is selected for promotion by the SSB and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007903

    Original file (20080007903.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states “My eligibility for promotion to CW4 was not considered by the April 18-23, 2008 promotion Board. The applicant should have been considered for promotion to CW4 by the 2008 promotion selection board. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by submitting his records to a duly constituted Special Selection Board for consideration for Reserve promotion to Chief Warrant Officer Four under the 2008...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020760

    Original file (20090020760.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests correction of her records as follows: * Award of 8 years and 11 months of constructive service credit (CSC) in order to establish her promotion eligibility to major (MAJ) as March 2001 * Adjustment of her date of rank (DOR) as a MAJ to an appropriate date to put her in the zone for promotion to lieutenant colonel * Correction of her education error * Informing the U.S. Army...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004514C070206

    Original file (20050004514C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, promotion to captain in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) under the 2000 criteria, with entitlement to back pay and allowances, or promotion consideration to captain by a USAR special selection board (SSB) under the 2000 criteria. The opinion also stated that the applicant was considered and selected for promotion to captain by the FY 2004 Captain, Army Promotion Selection Board that recessed on 21 November 2003. Since there is no basis to consider...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023391

    Original file (20100023391.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Also on 11 March 2010, HRC-STL issued the applicant his promotion to LTC memorandum with an effective date of 11 March 2010. Therefore, the officer may have a maximum time in grade date that is before the approval date of the promotion advisory board/special selection board that recommended him or her for promotion. As a result, the Board recommends that all State Army National Guard records and Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending Federal...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006787

    Original file (20090006787.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The recommendation is that the applicant be granted a waiver based on completion of the course on 19 September 2008, and that his record be placed before an SSB for reconsideration for promotion to LTC under the FY 2008 RCSB criteria. An advisory from the Chief, Personnel Division, NGB also recommends that the applicant be granted a waiver for the military education requirement and that he be reconsidered for promotion to LTC by an SSB using the FY 2008 RCSB criteria. As a result, the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012187

    Original file (20100012187.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 5 December 1987, he accepted an appointment as a second lieutenant in the Georgia Army National Guard (GAARNG) and he continued to serve in the GAARNG until 5 December 2000, when he was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR). The letter provide by the applicant from the HRC-STL Special Actions Branch is sufficient to establish that due to the absence of his OERs from his official records during the promotion selection boards that convened from 2007 through 2009, the applicant did...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009001

    Original file (20080009001.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Paragraph 2-9 stipulates, in pertinent part, that effective 1 October 1995, no person may be selected for promotion to the Reserve grade of CPT unless, not later than the day before the selection board convene date, that person has been awarded a BA degree from an accredited institution recognized by the Secretary of Education or, within 3 years preceding promotion, the officer has earned a BA degree from an unaccredited educational institution that has been recognized by the Department of...