IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  10 February 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100016049 


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 for promotion to captain (CPT)/pay grade O-3 by Special Selection Boards (SSB) based on the 1994 and 1995 promotion criteria.

2.  The applicant states he believes his personnel records were received at the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (USA HRC) on 25 June 1993; however, his records were not entered into the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) system in a timely manner.  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).

   a.  He was separated from the Missouri Army National Guard (MOARNG) on 27 July 1992.
   
   b.  A document list from U.S. Army Human Resources Command (USA HRC) portal shows dates documents were added to his OMPF, as follows:

       (1)  NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) on
25 June 1993;

       (2)  DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) on 25 June 1993;

       (3)  DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) on 30 June 2010 [sic];
   
       (4)  three DA Forms 67-8 (Officer Evaluation Reports [OERs]), with ending dates of 31 May 1989, 8 December 1990, and 7 September 1991, on 19 March 1995;

       (5)  two DA Forms 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Reports [AERs]) for completion of the Signal Officer Basic Course and Signal Officer Advanced Course, on 21 July 2009; and

       (6)  Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Administration from the University of Missouri on 13 October 2009.

   c.  His board file went before the Fiscal Year 1994 (FY94) DA CPT RCSB without any OERs and, based on the date they were added, perhaps the FY95 DA CPT RCSB also because he was non-selected for promotion by both boards.

   d.  After being twice non-selected for promotion, he involuntarily resigned on 1 March 1996.

   e.  He reentered the USAR in 2008 and was selected for promotion to CPT by the most recent CPT promotion board.

3.  The applicant provides copies of a document list from USA HRC portal and the documents specified in paragraph 2b (above) in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) and MOARNG on 7 March 1984.

2.  The applicant was appointed as a commissioned officer in the ARNGUS and MOARNG in the rank of second lieutenant/pay grade O-1 effective 7 May 1988.
The applicant:

* completed the Signal Officer Basic Course on 8 December 1989
* received a Bachelor of Science degree on 11 May 1991
* was promoted to first lieutenant/pay grade O-2 effective 24 May 1991
* completed the Signal Officer Advanced Course on 14 February 1992
* honorably separated from the ARNGUS and MOARNG on 27 July 1992
* transferred to the USAR Individual Ready Reserve effective 28 July 1992


3.  U.S. Total Army Personnel Command, St. Louis, MO, memorandum, dated
1 March 1996, Subject:  Notification of Promotion Status, shows the applicant was notified of his second non-selection for promotion to CPT and, as a result, he must be separated from the USAR.

4.  The applicant had a break in service from 3 May 1996 through 3 September 2008.

5.  The applicant was appointed a commissioned officer in the USAR in the rank of 1LT (O-2) effective 4 September 2008. 

6.  USAHRC, St. Louis, MO, Orders B-05-003058, dated 18 May 2010, promoted the applicant to CPT effective and with a date of rank of 13 May 2010.

7.  A review of the applicant's OMPF document list available via the USA HRC Integrated Web System (IWS) confirms the information the applicant provides in his application with respect to the filing of the documents in his OMPF, with the exception of his DA Form 2-1, which was added on 30 June 1993 (vice 30 June 2010).  Further review of the DA Form 2-1 shows in:

   a.  item 17 (Civilian Education and Military Schools), in pertinent part, the applicant:

(1)  completed the 18-week Signal Officer Basic Course in 1989,

      (2)  received a 4-year Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Missouri-Columbia in 1991, and

(3)  completed the 21-week Signal Officer Advanced Course in 1992; and

   b.  item 33 (Date) the applicant reviewed the information on his DA Form 2-1 on 26 April 1992.

8.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Special Actions Branch, DA Promotions, USA HRC, Fort Knox, KY.

   a.  The advisory official recommends disapproval of the applicant's request for consideration by SSBs under the 1994 and 1995 criteria for promotion to CPT.

   b.  The advisory official states the applicant was considered and non-selected for promotion to CPT by the 1994 and 1995 DA CPT RCSBs.

     (1) The board results verify his non-selections were not based on education.

       (2)  The reasons for his non-selections are unknown because statutory requirements prevent disclosure of board proceedings to anyone not a member of the board.

       (3)  The applicant's board files for 1994 and 1995 are no longer available and it cannot be determined what documents were or were not considered by the boards.

       (4)  The 1994 Board viewed hard copy documents and, because the file is no longer available, it cannot be determined if the three OERs the applicant identifies were viewed by the board.

       (5)  The three OERs in question were added to his OMPF on 19 March 1995 and it can be presumed the OERs were viewed by the 1995 Board.

   c.  The advisory official concludes that the applicant lacked due diligence and interest concerning his promotion and career from 1996 until his return to military service. 
   
9.  On 29 December 2010, the applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion in order to have the opportunity to respond to its contents.

10.  On 20 January 2011, the applicant provided his response.

   a.  He states when he relocated from Georgia in 1992, the U.S. Armed Forces were implementing a reduction in force and he was informed there weren’t any drilling reserve positions available.  As a result, he was involuntarily transferred to the USAR Control Group (Individual Ready Reserve [IRR]).

	    (1)  At that time, he was led to believe his military career was over.  He was unaware that he had an avenue to correct his records.

       (2)  In 2007, he learned about the opportunity to reenter the USAR, he returned to the military in 2008, and he is now attempting to correct the injustice.

   b.  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. He adds that either the Army promotion standards for CPT have drastically decreased over the years or the documents in question were not presented to the previous boards.  He concludes that the USA HRC recommendation of disapproval is based on speculation and assumption.

   c.  He requests reconsideration for promotion to CPT under the 1994 and 1995 promotion criteria and retroactive reinstatement in the USAR Control Group (IRR) from 1996 to 2008.

11.  Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) prescribes policy and procedures used for selecting and promoting commissioned officers (other than commissioned warrant officers) of the ARNGUS and of commissioned and warrant officers of the USAR.  

   a.  Chapter 2 (Promotion Eligibility and Qualification Requirements), Section III (Board Considerations), paragraph 2-15 (Exceptions), subparagraph b (General exceptions), states that the Commander, USA HRC, Chief, Office of Promotions (RC), is the approval authority for exceptions to all non-statutory promotion requirements.

   b.  Chapter 3 (Board Schedules and Procedures), Section III (Promotion Reconsideration Boards), paragraph 3-19 (General), provides that officers who have either failed of selection for promotion, or who were erroneously not considered for promotion through administrative error may be reconsidered for promotion by either a promotion advisory board or a special selection board.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his records should be considered for promotion to CPT (O-3) by SSBs based on the 1994 and 1995 promotion criteria because his personnel records were not updated in a timely manner and the documents were not available for review by the boards.

2.  Records show the applicant was considered and non-selected by the 1994 and 1995 CPT DA RCSBs.

   a.  The applicant's board files for 1994 and 1995 are no longer available and it can’t be determined what documents were or were not considered by the boards.

   b.  The applicant's DA Form 2-1 shows the civilian and military education he had completed at the time and that the document was reviewed by the applicant on 26 April 1992.  In addition, the DA Form 2-1 was added to the applicant’s OMPF on 30 June 1993.  Thus, this information was available for review by the 1994 and 1995 DA CPT RCSBs.
   c.  The three OERs in question were added to the applicant's OMPF on
19 March 1995 and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is reasonable to presume they were viewed by the 1995 DA CPT RCSB.

3.  The evidence of record does not support the applicant's contention that his personnel records were not updated in a timely manner or that information pertaining to his civilian and military education, and the OERs in question, were not viewed by the promotion board(s).  Therefore, in view of all of the foregoing, the applicant is not entitled to consideration for promotion to CPT by a SSB under the 1994 and/or 1995 selection criteria.

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)                                         AR20100016049



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100016049



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1