IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 14 October 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100011631
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 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).
2. The applicant states an OER with an ending date of 2 March 2008 was not completed until 26 June 2009. Therefore, this OER was not filed in his OMPF or considered by the 2008 and 2009 Captain (CPT) Army Reserve Component Selection Board. He continues by stating he was notified by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) in St. Louis (STL) that due to this omission, he is eligible for an SSB under the 2008 and 2009 promotion criteria.
3. The applicant provides as documentary evidence in support of his application a letter from Department of the Army (DA) promotions branch at HRC-STL, dated 21 January 2010; and an OER with a rating period from 17 March 2007 to 2 March 2008.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant was appointed a second lieutenant (2LT) in the Army Reserve on 13 May 2002.
2. On 9 October 2003, he accepted an appointment in the Army National Guard (ARNG) as a 2LT. He was promoted to first lieutenant (1LT) in the California ARNG (CAARNG) effective 13 May 2004.
3. By memorandum, dated 17 February 2008, the CAARNG notified the applicant that he was not selected for promotion to CPT by the 2008 1LT-CPT Army Promotion List DA Mandatory Selection Board.
4. By memorandum, dated 28 May 2009, the applicant was notified that a DA Mandatory Selection Board that convened on 4 November 2008 did not select him for promotion to CPT for the second time.
5. On 21 January 2010, HRC-STL responded to the applicant's request for an SSB. This letter stated he would have to apply through the Army Board for Correction of Military Records because of his pending discharge from military status on 31 March 2010 which is prior to an SSB convening and releasing its board results.
6. The applicant was separated from the ARNG on 31 March 2010. The reason for separation was due to twice non-selection for promotion.
7. As evidence to support his application, the applicant provided a copy of an OER for the period 17 March 2007 to 2 March 2008. This OER shows his rater, a battalion commander in the rank of lieutenant colonel (LTC), electronically signed this OER on 10 October 2008. Also on this same date, the senior rater serving as the deputy brigade commander in the rank of LTC electronically signed this OER. Nearly eight months later, on 26 June 2009, the applicant electronically signed this OER.
8. References:
a. Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers other than General Officers) prescribes the policy and procedures used for selecting and promoting commissioned officers of the Army National Guard of the U.S. and the Army Reserve. In pertinent part, it states for promotion consideration to CPT a qualified officer must have completed a bachelor degree, satisfactorily completed an officer basic course, and must be in an active status. The minimum time in grade requirements for consideration to the rank of CPT are 2 years and the maximum time in grade is 5 years as a 1LT.
b. Army Regulation 135-155 states that zone of consideration lists will be prepared according to criteria established by the Commander of HRC. Selection boards will be provided a promotion consideration file for each eligible officer. It will contain the performance portion of the OMPF to include OERs, academic evaluation reports, commendatory information, disciplinary information, a DA Form 4037 (Officer Record Brief ) or Personnel Qualification Record, an official photograph, and authorized communications to the promotion board president. In addition, 90 days before the convening date of a mandatory promotion board, the officers in the zone of consideration will receive written notification and told to review their records and submit missing documents or other corrections to HRC-STL through their respective personnel offices.
c. Army Regulation 135-155 states that officers and warrant officers who were not selected by promotion or who were erroneously not considered for promotion through administrative error may be reconsidered by a promotion advisory board or an SSB. 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.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. Based on the recommendation from HRC-STL and governing promotion regulations, the applicant is entitled to have his OMPF reviewed and considered by an SSB due to material error. An OER ending on 2 March 2008 was not completed and filed in his OMPF. Therefore, this OER was not made available to the 2008 and 2009 Army Reserve Components Selection Board; as such it is considered a material error.
2. Therefore, it would be appropriate to send the applicant's promotion file before an SSB under the provisions of the calendar year 2008 and 2009 CPT DA Army Reserve Components Selection Board criteria.
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 State
Army National Guard and Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:
a. sending his promotion file to an SSB for consideration under the 2008 and 2009 Captains DA Army Reserve Components Selection Board criteria;
b. if he is selected for promotion, his records be further corrected by voiding his 31 March 2010 discharge from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army and promoting him to captain with the appropriate date of rank and effective date of promotion and paying him any back due pay and allowances; or
c. if he is not selected for promotion, notifying him accordingly.
_______ _ __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) AR20100011631
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100011631
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
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 | 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 | 20100022165
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 available evidence shows that at the time the 2009 AMEDD CPT RCSB convened the applicant's OMPF contained a material error in the form of a missing OER. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. submitting the applicants records to a duly constituted SSB for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100020328
On 1 July 2003, the ABCMR granted him relief and directed correction of his records to show he was promoted to 1LT with an effective date and DOR of 31 March 1999 (2 years from his DOR as a 2LT). On 11 March 2009, by memorandum, an official at the Department of the Army (DA) Promotions, HRC-STL recommended disapproval of the applicant's request for promotion to CPT with a 2001 DOR and promotion to MAJ with a 2004 DOR. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army...
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 | CY2009 | 20090014193
The applicant requests, in effect, removal of the DA Form 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report (OER)) covering the rating period from 2 January 2006 through 30 November 2006 (hereafter referred to as the contested OER) from his records and declaring this period as nonrated time. The applicant states that the many comments on the contested OER violate Army Regulation 623-3 (Evaluation Reporting System); that the tasks required following the commanders inquiry were not performed; that the rating...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016049
As a result, documents were not available in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) for review by the 1994 and 1995 Department of the Army (DA) CPT Reserve Components Selection Boards (RCSB). He states he was selected by the 2010 CPT Promotion Board with the same documents in his 2010 board file that USA HRC presumes were reviewed in 1994 and 1995, with the exception of an additional unfavorable OER in 2009. The applicant contends that his records should be considered for promotion to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023391
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 | CY2010 | 20100015411
The applicant provides the following documentary evidence: * self-authored promotion date comparison sheet, dated 21 May 2010 * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Records), dated 9 June 1988 * DA Form 268 (Report for Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions), dated 17 February 1988 * memorandum, dated 5 February 1988, subject: Involuntary Separation Action * memorandum for record, dated 10 June 1988, concerning an appeal of his Officer Evaluation Report (OER) * Orders 6-3,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014833
Officials at the HRC-STL opine that the applicant was promoted to the rank of major based on his selection by the 2008 Major Reserve Component Selection Board and his DOR was based on the date of approval of that board, which was the earliest date allowed. Inasmuch as the Board directed a change to his DOR for promotion to the rank of CPT, the applicant's records were placed before a special selection board (SSB) for consideration under the 2007 criteria and that board's results have not...