Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016602
Original file (20100016602.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		
		BOARD DATE:	  17 February 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100016602 


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 continuation of the special selection board (SSB) process considering him for promotion to lieutenant colonel (LTC)/O-5 in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) under the 2003 through 2007 criteria.

2.  The applicant states that upon his return from Afghanistan in 2010, he was notified the SSB process for consideration for promotion to LTC in the USAR under the 2003-2007 criteria that had begun while he was on active duty was stopped.  He claims his records were not properly reviewed when they should have been due to errors beyond his control.  He believes his records were never reviewed by U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) because he was in a dual status.  He concludes by stating the Board should correct this injustice and his intent is to return to active duty.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application:

* HRC promotion documents, dated 29 February 2008 and 9 July 2008
* a U.S. Total Army Personnel Command (now know as HRC) promotion document, dated 12 June 1998
* an error memorandum, dated 29 February 2008
* an HRC notification letter, dated 28 January 2010



CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's record shows he served on active duty in the Regular Army (RA) in an enlisted status from 6 March 1976 through 28 February 2009, at which time he honorably retired in the rank of command sergeant major (CSM)/E-9.

2.  The record shows that on 11 June 1987, while serving on active duty as an RA sergeant first class/E-7, the applicant was appointed as a second lieutenant/O-1 in the USAR.  On 18 July 1990, he was promoted to USAR first lieutenant/O-2.

3.  On 1 February 1994, the applicant was promoted to CSM/E-9 in the RA.

4.  As a result of action by this Board, the applicant was considered and selected for promotion to USAR captain/O-3 on 18 July 1994 and to USAR major/O-4 on 12 June 1998 by an SSB.

5.  In August 2009, an SSB considered and did not select the applicant for promotion to LTC/O-5 under the 2001 promotion criteria.

6.  On 28 January 2010, the applicant was notified in an HRC, St. Louis, Missouri, memorandum that by direction of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, the practice of granting SSB's for former officers without directive of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) was stopped and as a result he would have to apply to this Board for further consideration by an SSB.

7.  Army Regulation 600-39 (Dual Component Personnel Management Program) set policy and responsibility governing the Dual Component Personnel Management Program in effect at the time.  It identified dual component personnel as RA or Army of the United States enlisted or warrant officer members serving in that capacity on active duty who have been appointed and who simultaneously hold status as a Reserve commissioned or warrant officer.  The dual service component concept was to swiftly satisfy mobilization requirements through procurement of trained commissioned and warrant officers.  Members on active duty afforded the Department of the Army ready assets during times of rapid expansion of the active component of the Army.  There were no provisions allowing for the continuation of members in a dual component status subsequent to their length of service retirement from active duty.

8.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 3964, provides the legal authority for advancement of warrant officers and enlisted members on the Retired List.  It states that warrant officer and enlisted members of the Army are entitled, when their active service plus their service on the Retired List totals 30 years, to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade in which they served on active duty satisfactorily.  There are no provisions allowing for advancement to a higher grade never held on active duty.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that the SSB process for his promotion to LTC/O-5 in the USAR should be continued and he should be returned to active duty has been carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.

2.  The evidence of record confirms that in August 2009 the applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to LTC/O-5 under the 2001 criteria while serving on active duty as an RA CSM/E-9.  It further shows he was subsequently released from active duty in an enlisted status and placed on the Retired List in the grade of CSM/E-9 on 28 February 2009.  Given the applicant was not selected for promotion to LTC/O-5 shortly before his retirement and subsequent to his attaining the RA enlisted grade of CSM/E-9, it is not likely his record would have supported his promotion to LTC/O-5 even had the SSB process continued.

3.  Given the applicant never served on active duty in a commissioned officer status and retired as an RA CSM/E-9, his USAR promotion to LTC/O-5 would not support his advancement on the Retired List nor would it provide a basis for his continued active duty service.  As a result, given no change in his current retired status would be achieved and no effective relief would result from further promotion consideration, it would not be appropriate to grant the requested 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 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)                                         AR20100016602



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100016602



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050011178C070206

    Original file (20050011178C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect, that he served from November 1967 to March 1974 as a Reserve officer on active duty (AD). While serving on AD, in the rank of SGM/E-9, the applicant was promoted as a Reserve commissioned officer to lieutenant colonel effective 11 December 1986, without being called to AD in that rank. The Board also finds no evidence that the applicant served 6 consecutive months on active duty as a LTC/O-5 or to show that he served satisfactorily in the grade of LTC in an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150011113

    Original file (20150011113.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 14 November 2013, in response to his petition to this Board for promotion consideration to LTC by an SSB, the Board granted him relief as follows: * submitting his records to an SSB for promotion consideration to LTC and if before promotion consideration he is removed from the RASL, correct his records by continuing the SSB * if selected for promotion, correct his records by voiding his removal from the RASL (retirement orders) and showing he met the eligibility criteria for promotion...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005812

    Original file (20130005812.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, the applicant provides the following documents: a. email messages (from March 2013) between the applicant and an official in Officer Promotions, HRC, that show: * the applicant inquired about his eligibility for promotion to LTC in the USAR * he was advised the FY08 Active Duty List (ADL) Board would have considered him had he still been in the USAR * he inquired when he would have been considered for promotion to LTC in the RA * he was advised the FY08 PSB would...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014503

    Original file (20130014503.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests: a. his date of rank (DOR) to lieutenant colonel (LTC) be adjusted from 13 April 2005 to 15 June 2008 to correspond with the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) adjusted Cohort Year Group 1993; b. his four Promotion Board pass-over's be zeroed out; c. the corrected record be considered by a Special Selection Board (SSB) related to Promotions, Command Senior Service College (SSC), and Professor of Military Science (PMS); and d. his name be deleted from the August...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006990

    Original file (20120006990.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of her records to show advancement on the Retired List to the rank/grade of captain (CPT)/O-3. She adds: * she was told by an official of the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) that her dual status does not qualify her for advancement * this contradicts what she was told in 2005/2006 as she retired from the Army * she was in a dual status, serving in the Regular Army as an enlisted Soldier while holding a Reserve commission * she communicated...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016408

    Original file (20130016408.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests reconsideration of the portion of his previous application pertaining to: * promotion reconsideration by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for promotion to lieutenant colonel (LTC)/O-5 under the criteria for Fiscal Year (FY) 2008 and FY 2009 * reconsideration of his application for appointment as an Engineer Branch warrant officer 2. The Board further determined there was no evidence showing he had completed the required military education to be considered for promotion...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003972

    Original file (20110003972.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests promotion to lieutenant colonel (LTC) by the September 2005 Special Selection Board (SSB) with back pay and allowances and placement on the Retired List in the grade of LTC. However, despite being in the Retired Reserve, in 1993 he was considered for promotion to MAJ, but he was not selected. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: * Voiding Orders 08-036-00050, issued by Headquarters,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006270

    Original file (20110006270.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    BOARD DATE: 24 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110006270 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On 14 July 2010, the applicant was advised by officials at HRC that he had been selected for promotion to LTC by an SSB; however, because he was retired and he was no longer in an active status (on the RASL), he could not be promoted. Accordingly, the applicant’s records should be corrected to show he was promoted to the rank of LTC on 21 December 2007 as if he was occupying an LTC...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011631

    Original file (20060011631.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The evidence of record shows that the applicant voluntarily retired from active duty in the rank of LTC (O-5) with 25 years and 23 days active service, effective 1 January 2006. The evidence of record also shows that the applicant retired from active duty, effective 1 January 2006. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. promoting the applicant to the rank of COL (O-6), effective and with a date of rank of 1...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060017622

    Original file (20060017622.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The evidence of record shows that the applicant voluntarily retired from active duty in the rank of LTC (O-5) with 25 years and 23 days active service, effective 1 January 2006. The evidence of record also shows that the applicant retired from active duty, effective 1 January 2006. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. promoting the applicant to the rank of COL (O-6), effective and with a date of rank of 1...