BOARD DATE: 3 November 2009
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090007628
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 that Notifications of Promotion Status, dated 27 February 2006, 4 August 2006, and 13 September 2006, be removed from his military records.
2. The applicant states that the three documents should be deleted from his records because he did not submit a promotion packet for O-7 [brigadier general] and that he was not eligible for promotion to O-7 because he did not have enough time in grade. He contends these documents imply non-selection, yet he did not submit a packet for promotion consideration for O-7 nor was he eligible to apply for O-7 even if he wanted to because he was promoted to O-6 [colonel] effective 9 January 2006 and he had to retire in February 2007 when he turned age 60.
3. The applicant provides copies of the three letters in support of his application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Having prior enlisted service in the U.S. Army Reserve, the applicant was appointed as a first lieutenant on 31 October 1980. He was promoted to lieutenant colonel on 14 April 1997 and further promoted to colonel on 9 January 2006.
2. By memorandum, dated 27 February 2006, the applicant was notified that a Department of the Army (DA) Special Selection Board (SSB) was convened to consider special selection board requests. He was considered for promotion under the 2001 criteria but was not selected for promotion. He was informed that he still had a basis for further consideration by a DA SSB under the 2003 criteria; therefore, his record had been scheduled for consideration by the next appropriate promotion selection board.
3. By memorandum, dated 4 August 2006, the applicant was notified that a DA SSB was convened to consider special selection board requests. He was considered for promotion under the 2003 criteria but was not selected for promotion. He was informed that he still had a basis for further consideration by a DA SSB under the 2004 criteria; therefore, his record had been scheduled for consideration by the next appropriate promotion selection board.
4. By memorandum, dated 13 September 2006, the applicant was notified that a DA SSB was convened to consider special selection board requests. He was considered for promotion under the 2004 criteria but was not selected for promotion. He was informed that in the absence of new evidence showing that an error or injustice exists, further consideration by an SSB was not possible.
5. On 22 February 2007, the applicant was assigned to the Retired Reserve for maximum authorized years of service.
6. A review of the applicant's official military personnel file (OMPF) on the interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System revealed a copy of the three Notifications of Promotion Status in question.
7. Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/ Records) provides policies, operating tasks, and steps governing the OMPF. Table 2-1 of this Army regulation shows that letters of notification announcing officer SSB results are filed in the service section of the OMPF.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. Although the applicant contends that the Notifications of Promotion Status in question pertain to a promotion to O-7, it appears these documents pertain to SSBs for promotion to colonel since he was not actually promoted to colonel until 2006. The Notifications of Promotion Status show he was considered under the 2001, 2003, and 2004 criteria.
2. There is no evidence that the Notifications of Promotion Status were improperly issuesd. The Notifications of Promotion Status were properly filed in the applicant's OMPF. Based on the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
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) AR20090007628
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090007628
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | AR20060012803C071029
In her rebuttal, the applicant states that the CGSOC is not a requirement for promotion to lieutenant colonel for Army nurses and that she only wanted to attend the CGSOC to make herself more competitive for promotion. There were four OERs in the applicant’s records at the time that she was considered for promotion in May 2003 which were not corrected until June 2006. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a....
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110016774
The applicant defers statements to counsel: COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE: Counsel states: a. the applicant was selected as an alternate to attend the Command and General Staff College (CGSC) and Logistics Executive Development Course (LEDC) on 27 January 2003; as a candidate to attend the resident LEDC in November 2003; however on 24 January 2003, he was mobilized in support of Operation Enduring Freedom for one year and unable to attend either course; b. during this...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050011572C070206
On 27 November 1996, the ABCMR approved the recommendation to correct his record to show he was selected for promotion to major under the 1993 criteria by a special selection board (SSB) that adjourned on 12 August 1996 and void his discharge. The HRC, St. Louis, issued a Notification of Promotion Status memorandum, dated 22 March 2004, advising the applicant of his non- selection for promotion to lieutenant colonel by a SSB under the 2001 year criteria. Notwithstanding the NGB advisory...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011113
He was told that one of the many possible reasons for non-selection may have been that his record did not show he had completed the military education requirement for promotion as specified in Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers), paragraph 2-6. Army Regulation 135-155 specifies that in order to be promoted to lieutenant colonel an individual must have completed 7 years of time in grade as a major and the required...
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 | CY2010 | 20100018522
Having prior enlisted service, the applicant's military record shows he was appointed as a U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) commissioned officer in the rank/grade of second lieutenant (2LT)/O-1 on 16 July 1986. On 28 September 2007 and 12 May 2010, the Chief, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components (RC), informed the applicant of the following: a. he was considered and selected for promotion to CPT by the 1993 CPT Department of the Army (DA) RC Selection Board (RCSB); however, a copy of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029760
The applicant requests promotion reconsideration to colonel by a special selection board (SSB) under the 2007 and 2009 year criteria. She was promoted to lieutenant colonel, effective 22 November 1998. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. ensuring that her OMPF is complete and accurate, including her officer evaluation reports for the periods ending 24 September 2006, 25 April 2007, and 25 April 2008; b....
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011579
The evidence shows the applicant was promoted to lieutenant colonel with a promotion effective date and date of rank of 30 August 1999. Based on the established zone of consideration for the 2002 RCSB and the applicant's date of rank for lieutenant colonel, he was not eligible for consideration for promotion to colonel by that board. He was considered and selected for promotion to colonel by a SSB that convened on 4 August 2006.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010007
The opinion stated that the applicant was considered for promotion by the 2002 and 2003 CPT DA RCSB and was not selected because his records did not contain evidence that he had completed a baccalaureate degree. However, based on the information provided in the advisory opinion, the applicant had submitted a request for a civilian education waiver in accordance with Title 10, U.S. Code, section 12205(d) prior to the convening date of the 2003 DA RCSB through his chain of command overseas. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120020640
Adjustment of his date of rank (DOR) to major (O-4) to 17 July 2003. c. ARNG promotion to lieutenant colonel (O-5), year group 2009. d. Waivers of military education requirements for O-5 promotion. On 21 February 2007, the applicant was notified he had been selected for promotion to major by an SSB with a promotion eligibility date of 17 July 2003. Revoking his discharge from the ARNG and as a Reserve of the Army, dated 1 February 2004. b.