IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 08 April 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090015272
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 he be given promotion reconsideration for the rank of captain.
2. The applicant states that at the end of the summer of 2008 he received an email from the Department of the Army telling him to check his official military personnel file (OMPF) to prepare for the upcoming captain board.
3. He checked with his unit's personnel officer and was told to check his OMPF on the integrated Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) and make sure it was up to date because that information would be used by the promotion board.
4. He later learned that he should have checked his Human Resources Command, St. Louis (HRC-STL) file which he knew nothing about. As a result he was passed over for promotion due to a lack of education even though he had a bachelor's degree.
5. The applicant provides a letter from the Chief, Special Actions Branch, HRC-STL, dated 18 June 2009, and his college transcript which shows he was conferred a bachelor of science degree on 7 March 2003.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG) on 8 October 2002 with prior inactive service.
2. He was commissioned as a second lieutenant on 23 August 2003 and he was promoted to 1st lieutenant effective 23 August 2005.
3. On 18 June 2009, HRC-STL responded to the applicant's request for a Special Selection Board (SSB). HRC-STL told the applicant that when his file was considered by the November 2008 Army Reserve Components Selection Board, it did not include verification of his civilian education. HRC-STL continued that he (the applicant) had from 8 September to 31 October 2008 to review his file. HRC-STL said that it is ultimately the final responsibility of the officer to make certain his promotion board file is complete. If he had exercised reasonable diligence and reviewed his promotion file, the error could have been discovered and corrected prior to the board. HRC-STL denied the applicant's request due to the fact that he did not review his promotion file.
4. The applicant is currently serving as an ARNG officer in the rank of
first lieutenant.
5. Army Regulation 135155 (ARNG and U.S. Army Reserve Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers), paragraph 29, Civilian education requirements, states that effective 1 October 1995, no person may be selected for promotion to the Reserve grade of captain unless that person has been awarded a baccalaureate degree from an accredited institution recognized by the Secretary of Education, not later than the day before the selection board convene date.
6. Army Regulation 135155, paragraph 319, General, states that promotion advisory boards/special selection boards are convened to correct/prevent an injustice to an officer or former officer who was eligible for promotion but whose records
* through error, were not submitted to a mandatory promotion selection board for consideration.
* contained a material error when reviewed by the mandatory selection board
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The absence of the applicant's college degree was certainly a material error which resulted in his nonselection for promotion to captain.
2. However, the applicant himself states that he was notified of his pending promotion consideration and was instructed to verify that the information and documentation on his iPERMS was correct and up to date. It is apparent that the applicant did not review his OMPF on iPERMS or he would have seen that his college degree was not posted to his records.
3. As such, the material error in the applicant's file was an omission which would have been discovered if the applicant had exercised reasonable diligence and reviewed his promotion file.
4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis to grant 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) AR20090015272
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090015272
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140020982
c. Army Regulation 135-155 (ARNG and USAR Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers other than General Officers) lists the military education requirements for promotion selection. The memorandum states the records reviewed by the selection board did not indicate he had completed the required civilian and/or military education by the date the board convened. iPERMS shows that a legible copy of his college transcript was filed in his OMPF on 1 June 2011, 7 months after the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021882
A review of his records maintained in the interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) revealed that HRC-St. Louis (HRC-STL), issued the applicant a notification of promotion status memorandum, dated 3 July 2007, advising him he had been considered and was not among those selected for promotion by the Department of the Army Reserve Components Mandatory Selection Board that convened on 12 March 2007. Army Regulation 135-175 provides that an officer in the grade of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011053
The applicant states, in effect, she was erroneously not selected for promotion by the Department of the Army (DA) Promotion Board (twice) and she believes it was due to an Interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) error in her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). She was considered a second time for promotion by the FY11 1LT-CPT DA board on 2 November 2010 and was non-selected for promotion and no reason was given. The evidence of record shows she was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011631
The applicant requests consideration before a special selection board (SSB) because an officer evaluation report (OER) was not completed and filed in his official military personnel file (OMPF). When HRC, Office of Promotions determines a board file contains a material error such as one or more missing evaluation reports that should have been seen by the promotion board, was missing from the officer's OMPF, then an officer's promotion file will be referred to an SSB. As a result, the Board...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019186
He completed his degree requirements before the Army Promotion List (APL) Board date and, due to an administrative error, Officer of Personnel Management did not update his civilian education records in the interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS). Officer Personnel Management failed to submit his promotion file to the APL Board per Military Personnel (MILPER) Message Number 12-222 (Fiscal Year 2013, CPT, Army Reserve Active Guard Reserve, Army Reserve Non-Active...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014756
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of her military records by having her promotion packet submitted to a special selection board for consideration. Therefore, upon review of the evidence presented and the materials provided by the Soldier, there is no evidence of error or injustice regarding her request. The applicant contends her promotion packet should be submitted to an SSB board for consideration because her civilian education was not considered during the FY2013 CPT...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007618
She was a first lieutenant (1LT) in the Alaska Army National Guard (AKARNG). The Board obtained an advisory opinion from the National Guard Bureau (NGB) and mailed her a copy at her Alaska address. It is an unavoidable fact that some officers considered for promotion will not be selected for promotion.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018300
The waiver stipulated that it was granted for promotion consideration only and that the applicant must complete the required education in order to be promoted. This official further stated that the applicant's waiver was granted for promotion consideration only and stipulated that the applicant was required to complete the civilian education requirement not later than 24 October 2007 in order to be promoted. The evidence of record confirms that although the applicant was granted a civilian...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120014844
The applicant provides: * a DA Form 2B (Personnel Qualification Record) * a Reserve Status Statement and Election of Options * eleven emails * three memoranda for record * two memoranda * one All Army Activities (ALARACT) message * one military personnel (MILPER) message * a page from the U.S Army Human Resources Command (HRC) Website * a letter of completion request * an application for diploma * a 3-page worksheet CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. He submitted three memoranda, dated 19...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022679
The records reviewed by the Department of the Army Selection Board did not indicate he had completed the required civilian and/or military education by the day before the date the board convened on 3 November 2009. b. This memorandum states Reserve officers in the grade of first lieutenant not selected for promotion are considered again by a selection board approximately 1 year later. He provides an email from an official at Department of the Army Promotions, HRC, dated 22 October 2012,...