IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  17 January 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110010942 


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, a DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period 24 September 1953 to 
26 April 1983.  Additionally, he requests promotion to the grade of colonel (COL)/O6 

2.  He states he served in the Army during World War II and was discharged as a sergeant.  He offers that during his military career, active and Reserve, he had two reference numbers:  service number and social security number (SSN).  He states he believes that the Standby Advisory Board (STAB) used one of the two possible files, either the file containing his SSN or the file containing his service number. 

3.  He provides the following:

* Self-authored statement
* Appointment orders, dated 28 May 1951
* AAA Associate Battery Officer Course diploma, dated 31 January 1952 
* Officers' Leadership Course diploma, dated 12 December 1952
* Special Orders Number 191, dated 30 September 1960
* Associate Air Defense Officer Career Course diploma, dated 3 November 1960
* Certificate of Training, dated 9 February 1963
* Congratulatory certificate
* Completion of subcourse, dated 13 August 1963
* Certificate of Training, dated 1 February 1964
* Certificate of Completion, dated 28 August 1964
* Engineer Officer Career Course diploma, dated 3 April 1967
* Certificate of Training, undated
* Promotion to LTC
* Special Orders Number 44, dated 5 March 1971
* Letter, Subject:  Removal from an Active Status in the United Sates Army Reserve (USAR)
* Orders 10-76700, dated 20 October 1977
* Certificate of Appreciation, dated 20 October 1977
* Permanent Orders 82-11 with Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) certificate, dated 2 December 1977
* Retired Reserve certificate, dated 20 October 1977
* Certificate of retirement, dated 26 April 1983
* Special Orders Number 184, dated 22 September 1953

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  Per conversation with the applicant on 3 January 2012 in which it was explained that his records contain two DD Forms 214 for his active duty service during the period he requested, he stated that he was not aware that a
DD Form 214 is only issued for active duty service.  He agreed that the
DD Forms 214 in his record correctly reflected all his active duty service.  Therefore, his request concerning a DD Form 214 for the period 24 September 1953 to 26 April 1983 will not be discussed any further in the Record of Proceedings.

3.  The applicant's records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 17 July 1943.  He served 2 years, 6 months, and 26 days and was honorably discharged from active duty in the rank of sergeant on 12 February 1946.

4.  On 28 May 1951, he was appointed as a second lieutenant in the Officers' Reserve Corps.  On 24 September 1951, he was ordered to active duty.  He served 2 years on active duty and on 23 September 1953, he was released from active duty and returned to the USAR. 

5.  His records show effective the following dates he was promoted to:

* 1 January 1957, captain (CPT)/O3
* 13 October 1962, major (MAJ)/O4
* 13 October 1969, LTC/O5

6.  On 8 June 1971, he was notified of his eligibility for retired pay at age 60 
(20-Year Letter).

7.  In a letter from the Office of the Adjutant General, Reserve Components Personnel and Administration Center (RCPAC), St. Louis, MO, Subject:  Consideration for Promotion to COL, USAR, dated 17 May 1973, the applicant was informed that he was considered for promotion to the grade of COL, but was not selected.  The letter explained that the board reviewed and evaluated his entire military file and while an officer may be fully qualified for selection, he may not be one of the few selected for promotion.

8.  A Disposition Form (DF), dated 23 October 1974, shows that the applicant was eligible for reconsideration for promotion to COL.  The DF explained that when the applicant was considered for promotion by the August 1974 board, his retirement year ending (RYE) points for May 1974 were incorrect and had since been corrected.  Therefore, it was requested that he be placed before the STAB for reconsideration for promotion to the next higher grade.

9.  On 21 November 1974, he was notified that the STAB which convened on
5 November 1974, considered him for promotion using the 1974 criteria, but he was not recommended.  The letter further stated that the specific reasons for the board's decision were unknown since the STAB was not required nor permitted to divulge such information.

10.  In a letter from the Office of the Adjutant General, RCPAC, St. Louis, MO, Subject:  Consideration for Promotion to COL, USAR, dated 23 September 75, informed the applicant that he was considered for promotion to the grade of COL, but was not selected.  The letter explained that the board reviewed his entire military file and while an officer may be fully qualified for selection, he may not be one of the few selected for promotion.

11.  In a letter Subject:  Promotion Consideration in the USAR, dated 5 October 1976,  he was informed that a review of his records reveal his point for RYE 
15 May 1975 were incorrectly submitted the Department of the Army Reserve Component Selection Board that convened on 5 August 1975.  Therefore, his records were referred to a STAB for reconsideration under the criterion of the 1975 board.

12.  On 4 November 1976, he was notified that the STAB which convened on
21 October 1976, considered him for promotion using the 1975 criteria, but he was not recommended.  The letter further stated that the specific reasons for the board's decision were unknown since the STAB was not required nor permitted to divulge such information.

13.  On 21 September 1977, it was explained that based on his failure to be selected for promotion and because he was credited with 20 or more qualifying years of service for retire pay benefits, he was being removed from an active status in the USAR.  On 20 October 1977, he was reassigned to the USAR Control Group (Retired).   

14.  On 2 December 1977, he was awarded the MSM.

15.  On 26 April 1983, he was placed on the retired list in the retired grade of LTC.

16.  He provided numerous certificates and an order verifying he successfully completed the Associate Air Defense Officer Course, Officers' Leadership Course, Nuclear Weapons Employment Phase Course, Command and General Staff Officer Refresher Logistical Command Course, Protective Construction (Nuclear) Subcourse, Counterinsurgency Orientation Course, Engineer Officer Career Course, and Associate Command and General Staff Course.  The certificates and the order for the Engineer Officer Career Course, Protective Construction (Nuclear) Subcourse, Nuclear Weapons Employment Phase Course, and the Associate Command and General Staff Course all show a service number.  The certificates for the other courses contain his name only.  All the courses were completed as a second lieutenant, CPT, and/or MAJ and prior to his promotion to LTC.  

17.  Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) in effect at the time, prescribes policy and procedures to consider, select, and promote commissioned officers of the Army National Guard of the United States and the USAR and warrant officers of the USAR as Reserve commissioned officers/warrant officers of the Army.  Chapter 
3-4 states that the Commanding General, RCPAC, will notify each USAR nominee who is in the zone of consideration by a mandatory selected board and is not on active duty.  For information and appropriate corrections, a copy of the officer's records that the selection board will review will accompany the notification letter.  It is the responsibility of each eligible officer to review their record for accuracy and completeness and to submit copies of missing documents or corrections for review by the board.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no evidence, and the applicant has failed to provide any to show that the STAB did not consider "all" of his records in their consideration of him for promotion to COL. 

2.  The evidence of record shows that he was considered for promotion to COL in 1973, 1974, and 1975.  Additionally, there were two STABs convened on 
5 November 1974 and 21 October 1976 that reconsidered him for promotion to COL using the 1974 and 1975 criteria, respectively.  The specific reason cited for both STABs was listed as his "incorrect RYE."  In all cases, his entire military file was reviewed for promotion consideration to the rank of COL, but he was not recommended.

3.  Additionally, he provided certificates and an order that shows he successfully completed numerous courses.  However, these courses were all completed while he served in the rank of second lieutenant, CPT, and/or MAJ.  Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that these same certificates and the order were reviewed by the promotion board during their consideration and subsequent selection of him to the rank of LTC.  Based on this assumption, it does not appear that the fact that his records contain documents with a SSN while other documents contain a service number interfered with his promotion.

4.  Further, as cited in the above regulation," a copy of the officer's records that the selection board will review will accompany the notification letter."  The applicant has provided no evidence nor did he state in his application or self-authored statement that he was not afforded the opportunity to review his records prior to the three selection boards and the two STABs that were convened to consider him for promotion to COL .

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's 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 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)                                         AR20110010942





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110010942



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1