Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007666
Original file (20100007666.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	    24 August 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100007666


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 reconsideration of his previous request for a civilian education waiver and promotion reconsideration to captain by a special selection board (SSB).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was considered for promotion to captain by the Department of the Army (DA) 2008 Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB) that deliberated from 6 November 2007 to 15 November 2007.  He was not selected.  He was again considered for promotion to captain, this time by the DA 2009 RCSB that convened on 4 November 2008.  He was once again not selected.

3.  The applicant states he wrote both promotion boards stating he would not receive his baccalaureate degree until December 2008 and asking to be granted a waiver for civilian education.  He adds the correspondence was not received by the boards prior to their convening dates.

4.  The applicant provides:

* education records showing he was enrolled in classes as early as 2003
* orders, dated 29 November 2004, showing his mobilization in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom for 2 years
* education records showing he resumed his civilian education in 2006
* two recent DA Forms 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report (OER)) showing he has continued his exemplary service

* one OER for the period 20071201-20081130
* one OER for the period 20090201-20090715

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20090012765, on 15 December 2009.

2.  The applicant submitted the documents listed in paragraph 4 above.  The following is known concerning these documents:

* his civilian educational progress was previously known to the Board, as he provided it in college transcripts with his original case
* his deployment in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom was previously known to the Board
* he previously submitted the OER for the period 20071201-20081130
* only the OER for the period 20090201-20090715 is considered new evidence warranting consideration by the Board

3.  The applicant received an OER for the period 20090201-20090715, a period of 6 months of rated time, as a change of rater report.  The OER covers his duties as an engineer officer assigned to the Missouri Army National Guard's (MOARNG) 735th Quartermaster (Force Provider (FP)) Company, Desoto, MO.  In Part IV (Performance Evaluation-Professionalism-Values), the rater gave him all "Yes" ratings.  In Part Va (Performance Potential Evaluation), the rater checked the "Satisfactory Performance-Promote" block and entered supporting comments in Part Vb.  In Part Vc, the rater stated the applicant had "the potential to be successful in positions of increased responsibility," but he recommended the applicant "should continue as the 735th FP Co Engineer Officer or in an Assistant S-3 position."

4.  In the OER for the period 20090201-20090715, the senior rater placed an "X" in the "Fully Qualified" block in Part VIIa.  The OER is not entered in his iPERMS (interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System) file.  The senior rater also agreed the applicant should continue to serve in his current position, but should seek positions of greater responsibility.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The new evidence provided by the applicant shows:

* the rater evaluated his performance as "Satisfactory Performance-Promote" when even a center-of-mass performance would have been rated "Outstanding Performance-Must Promote"
* rater comments on potential even in a center-of-mass OER would have said the applicant has demonstrated unlimited potential for increased responsibility and would have recommended positions of greater responsibility, not continuation of current duties
* the senior rater evaluated his promotion potential as "Fully Qualified" when "Best Qualified" more appropriately characterizes even a center-of-mass performance

2.  Given the applicant's past performance as characterized by two referred OERs in his prior case, the subject OER does not support his contention that his performance warrants approval of a civilian education waiver and reconsideration for promotion by an SSB.

3.  The applicant had a responsibility to look after his career.  He knew that completion of a Bachelor's Degree was a regulatory requirement for promotion to captain.  He also knew or should have known his records would be going before the 2007 and 2008 RCSBs, and that he had deadlines for submitting various requests, including requests for civilian education waivers; yet he twice failed to timely submit his requests for approval prior to board consideration.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must satisfactorily show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant did not submit sufficient evidence that would satisfy this requirement.  Therefore, he is not entitled to relief.

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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20090012765, dated 15 December 2009.



      __________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)                                         AR20100007666



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                      

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001054867C070420

    Original file (2001054867C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He was considered and not selected for promotion to LTC by the 1997 and 1998 RCSB’s. His records were completed and without material error and included all pertinent documents when reviewed by the 1997 and 1998 promotion selection boards.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050009027

    Original file (20050009027.doc) Auto-classification: Denied
  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012765

    Original file (20090012765.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant submitted a copy of a memorandum, dated 14 November 2008, addressed to the President, 2008 Engineer Officer Review Board, in which he stated that he would graduate with a Bachelor's Degree in Biology on 20 December 2008. The civilian education requirement is a Baccalaureate Degree. On 18 June 2009, by letter, the Chief, Special Actions Branch, DA Promotions, USAHRC-St. Louis notified the applicant that at the time he was considered for promotion in November 2008, he had not...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062470C070421

    Original file (2001062470C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In pertinent part, Army Regulation 135-155 states that an officer who twice fails to be selected for promotion to captain, major, or lieutenant colonel will not again be considered for promotion and will be removed from an active status. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded: The contention that a copy of his Master of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070008239

    Original file (20070008239.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 May 1999, the HRC-St. Louis, Missouri, Deputy Chief, Officer of Promotions, responded to the applicant informing him that: a. he was considered for promotion to LTC by the 1996, 1997, and 1998 Reserve Component Selection Board (RCSB), but was not recommended for promotion. Note that for the DA Form 67-8 the rating system depicted below has six entries: the first two entries are derived from the rater performance and potential blocks, expressed in numerals, with 1 the highest and 5 the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068555C070402

    Original file (2002068555C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his below center-of-mass Officer Evaluation Report (OER), DA Form 67-9, for the period 16 May 1998 through 18 March 1999, be removed from his military record. On 30 January 2002, the senior rater provided a letter in support of the applicant's OER appeal. The OSRB states, in pertinent part, "The SR (senior rater) in this letter does not claim he erred when authoring the OER.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040005553C070208

    Original file (20040005553C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    This request for reconsideration was made after he successfully appealed, in his counsel's words, "two Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs), with non-credible senior rater (SR) profiles, after his separation from the Army." When the Board considered the applicant's case in February 2004, the OER that the applicant had successfully appealed contained the following senior rater profiles and senior rater comments: a. (On 9 September 1992, after the Reduction in Force Board had considered this...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080004022

    Original file (20080004022.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, promotion reconsideration to lieutenant colonel by a special selection board (SSB), under the 2006 year criteria. The applicant also states, in effect, that he would like his records to be carefully considered by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records and reviewed as early as possible since he received a second pass-over for lieutenant colonel by the 2007 Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB). In an advisory opinion, dated 2 May 2005, the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711722

    Original file (9711722.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of his military records to void his discharge and to show he was selected and promoted to major. Included with his application are memorandums from the National Guard Bureau (NGB) showing the reason he was not selected was based on two evaluation reports showing “Do Not Promote”, and also based on the lack of a baccalaureate degree. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010374C070208

    Original file (20040010374C070208.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's Officer Record Brief shows he was assigned with the 343rd Support Center, Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) from 28 March 1994 to 1 December 1996, and he was promoted to major/O-5 (MAJ/O-5) on 22 June 1995. On 17 May 2004, the Chief, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, informed the applicant that a Special Selection Board (SSB) convened to consider him for promotion to LTC under the 2002 criteria; however, he was again not selected for promotion, which confirmed...