IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE:	  1 November 2012 

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110020089 


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 the effective date of his primary area of concentration (AOC) of 70A (Healthcare Administrator) be changed to 2 February 2010.  He also requests reconsideration for promotion to lieutenant colonel (LTC)/O-5 under the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 LTC Army Medical Department (AMEDD) LTC Selection Board Memorandum of Instruction (MOI).

2.  He states:

	a.  he submitted a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) in February 2010 to change his AOC from 67J (Aeromedical Evacuation) to 70A in accordance with DA Pamphlet 600-4 (AMEDD Officer Development and Career Management).  The packet containing the DA Form 4187 was received on 16 February 2010.

	b.  he was required to change his AOC in order to compete for a doctorate (PhD) program in Healthcare Administration.  Only those in AOC 70A could apply, but those in AOC 67J were not permitted to apply to the program.

	c.  his AOC was changed in February 2010 and he competed on the Long-Term Health Education and Training (LTHET) Board as a 70A.  The process for an AOC change does not have a method for officially notifying the service member requesting the action or the endorsing consultant that the action was approved or disapproved.

	d.  as a result of his selection as an alternate for LTHET, he believed the action was completed and he was converted to primary AOC 70A.  He provided evidence to support his claims.  

	e.  he reviewed the results of the FY 2011 AMEDD LTC Selection Board and found out he was erroneously boarded as a 67J, which resulted in his 
non-selection for promotion.  He was informed by an LTC that his non-selection 
for promotion was due to him being boarded as a 67J, which had a ceiling of 5.

	f.  the promotion board selected all eligible 70As from below the zone in an attempt to decrease the shortage in the FY 1995 year group.  

   g.  he was notified on 7 July 2011 that the error was corrected and his AOC was changed to 70A.  He believes his AOC change was not completed in a timely manner because of the Human Resources Command (HRC) transition from Alexandria, VA to Fort Knox, KY.  

3.  He provides:

* Addendum to application
* Memorandum, Subject: Height/Weight and Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) Verification for the LTHET application, (applicant's name), dated 26 January 2010
* Memorandum, Subject: Consultant Endorsement for the LTHET Application (applicant's name), dated 26 January 2010 
* DA Form 4187, dated 3 February 2010, requesting his primary AOC be changed to 70A 
* DA Form 3838 (Application for Short Course Training)
* Electronic mail (e-mail) correspondence
* DA Form 4187, dated 13 June 2011, requesting his primary AOC be changed from 67J to 70A
* Memorandum, Subject: Endorsement of Request Correction to Military Records, (applicant's name), dated 7 September 2011
* Military Personnel (MILPER) Message Number 09-296, issued on 10 December 2009, 19 pages
* Medical Service Corps (MSC) 2010 LTHET Board Results Primary and Alternate Selections
* Memorandum, Subject: Amendment to ABCMR Case Number AR20110020089, dated 22 May 2012 
* MSC Majors (MAJ) Considered/Recommended for Promotion to LTC (except below the zone non-selects)
* AMEDD Personnel Proponent Directorate
* Annex A, Eligibility and Requirements – Instructions for FY2012 LTC Promotion Selection Boards 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the rank/pay grade of LTC/O-5.

2.  Following prior enlisted service, he was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer on 14 May 1995 in the rank of second lieutenant.  

3.  His service record indicates he was promoted to:

* first lieutenant on 3 June 1997
* captain on 1 July 1999
* MAJ on 1 September 2005

4.  In a 26 January 2010 memorandum, the commanding officer of the U.S. Army Medical Department Activity, Redstone Arsenal, AL, verified the applicant had a current APFT, height, and weight status and was in compliance with the height and weight standards set forth in Army Regulation 600-9 (The Army Weight Control Program). 

5.  In a 26 January 2010 memorandum, the 70A Consultant officer at Fort Sam Houston, TX, indicated she fully supported the applicant's LTHET application for the PhD in Healthcare Administration and Management program.  This memorandum does not mention endorsement for the applicant's request to change his primary AOC from 67J to 70A.  

6.  A DA Form 4187, dated 2 February 2010, indicates the applicant requested his primary AOC be changed from 67J to 70A.  He indicated he hadn't received flight pay since January 2009.  His commanding officer recommended approval.  His service record is void of evidence which indicates this request was approved.  

7.  On 4 February 2010, he submitted a DA Form 3838 requesting to attend PhD Management/Healthcare Administration training from August 2011 to August 2014 at a civilian institution.  On 3 February 2010, his commanding officer recommended approval of his request.  The application shows his AOC as 70A.  

8.  On 31 May 2011, he emailed an LTC at the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel (ODCSPER) requesting assistance to get a copy of his board file and information on the process of an administrative relook board.  On 1 June 2011, the LTC at ODCSPER replied to the applicant indicating:
* there was nothing negative in his file
* there were eight 67Js and no more than five were selected
* officers had to request a review on their own behalf
* he would be reviewed again for promotion next year
* those officers who were 2-time non-select could be called to selective continuation on active duty or receive a separation notice 

9.  On 12 June 2011, he resubmitted his request to change his primary AOC from 67J to 70A.  On 13 June 2011, his commanding officer recommended approval.  

10.  In a 20 July 2011 email, an MSC assignments branch officer informed the applicant that his request for change of his primary AOC was staffed through the 67J Consultant and the 70A Consultant and that his request had been approved.  

11.  In a 7 September 2011 memorandum, the 70A Consultant officer to the Army Surgeon General indicated she had endorsed the applicant's request to change his primary AOC to 70A in February 2010.  The 70A Consultant officer indicated she supported the applicant's change in AOC for his career progression and to enable him to apply for the FY2011 LTHET board for PhD in Healthcare Administration.  In addition, the 70A Consultant officer verified the error had been corrected and as of 7 July 2011 the applicant was a 70A.  

12.  In a 30 September 2011 memorandum addressed to this Board, the applicant reiterated the statements indicated on his application requesting corrections to his military record.  

13.  The MSC 2010 LTHET Board results indicated the applicant was selected for the PhD Program in AOC 70A as an alternate.  

14.  On 17 November 2011, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Health Services Division (HSD), HRC, Fort Knox, KY.  This office did not concur with the applicant's reconsideration for promotion to LTC.  The opinion stated:

	a.  HSD repeatedly advised the applicant on the proper procedures to follow in order to complete an AOC change prior to the FY2011 AMEDD LTC Selection Board.  Unfortunately, his initial AOC change request received in February 2010 was lacking required endorsements.

	b.  HSD contacted the applicant multiple times and recommended he change his AOC for the upcoming promotion board in order to compete for promotion with a 67A/70A AOC.

	c.  the FY2011 LTHET Selection Board and FY2011 AMEDD LTC Selection Board both indicate the applicant competed as a 67J AOC officer.  The opinion indicated this AOC was assigned to the applicant upon graduating from Initial Entry Rotary Wing Flight training in 1997 and was on his Officer Record Brief and board file, which the applicant had every opportunity to review.

	d.  after the FY2011 AMEDD LTC Selection Board results were released in June 2011, the applicant properly requested an AOC change from 67J/70A to 67A/70A.  Upon his request, the applicant's AOC was changed and he will be boarded as 67A/70A.

15.  On 21 November 2011, another advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Officer Promotions Special Actions, HRC, Fort, Knox, KY.  This office stated the applicant's request for reconsideration of promotion by a Special Selection Board cannot be approved.  The opinion stated:

	a.  the applicant's board file affirmed he was considered under the correct criteria during the FY2011 LTC AMEDD MSC Promotion Selection Board as a 67J.

	b.  the applicant's DA Form 4187, dated 3 February 2010, requesting primary AOC change was not supported by the consultant.  The advisory opinion cited MILPER Message Number 09-296, paragraph F and stated this message also included support examples; however, support of a primary AOC change did not occur until 7 September 2011, which was several months after the applicant's non-select for promotion.  

	c.  email correspondence from the applicant's Branch Office reflects some history in their attempts in assisting him with his records/board file updates and to clarify his intentions as it related to support or a change in his primary AOC from 67J to 70A.  The applicant's Branch office should be contacted to verify exactly what additional training was or should be required for this change.  

	d.  an additional review of the documents provided notes that the applicant was selected as an alternate for the LTHET program, Academic Year 2011, course date between 1 August 2011 and 31 August 2014.  The advisory opinion cited Department of Defense Instruction Number 1320.11 (Special Selection Boards), paragraph 4.2.

16.  On 30 November 2011, the applicant submitted a rebuttal to the advisory opinion and he argues:

	a.  the advisory opinion erroneously suggested the consultant's endorsement of his AOC change in February did not occur.  However, the memorandum contained in the ABCMR file shows the consultant clearly states she endorsed the AOC change in February 2010.

	b.  the advisory opinion indicates he didn't get consultant endorsement until September 2011, which was also incorrect.  However, he obtained an endorsement in February 2010 and again in June 2011 to correct the error made in his records.  He received a confirmation email from MSC Branch that his AOC was changed.

	c.  the advisory opinion is confusing dates and actions and is putting him at a disadvantage in this request to correct his records.

	d.  there are two separate actions; the Personnel Action to change his AOC and the LTHET Board Application.  He submitted the DA Form 4187 to change his AOC in February 2010; he received the endorsement from the Consultant in February 2010; and he had contact with HRC in which they indicated he was a 70A.

	e.  he outlined the actions he took to change his AOC to 70A.

	f.  the advisory opinion references the Department of Defense instruction 1320.11 regarding a Special Selection Board.  He states he demonstrated he maintained reasonable care to ensure his record was correct.

	g.  he believes his non-selection for LTC was based on a ceiling placed on the number of MOS 67J that could be promoted.  He states he should not have been boarded as a 67J, but as a 70A.  His year group is short 70As and he would have been selected for promotion if his record was correctly board.  

17.  In a memorandum, dated 22 May 2012, the applicant requested an amendment to his application.  He stated:

	a.  on 22 May 2012, he received the results of the FY2012 LTC AMEDD Selection Board which incorrectly shows he was boarded as AOC 67J for the second year in a row.

	b.  following the release of the results from the FY2011 LTC AMEDD Selection Board, he resubmitted his AOC change request in an email on 13 June 2012 to LTC (P) J__ D____ and LTC A___ C_____.

	c.  on 20 June 2012, he received an email from LTC C_____ from MSC Assignments branch stating his primary AOC was changed to 67A/70A.

	d.  he highlighted the results of the FY2012 LTC AMEDD Promotion Board which indicated he was boarded as a 67J in error again.

	e.  he was selected for promotion by the FY2012 AMEDD LTC Promotion Board because the Board MOI didn't have a ceiling on 67Js unlike the FY2011 Board MOI.  Additionally, the promotion year group (PYG) 1996 was under strength 67J which also aided his promotion selection as a 67J in FY2012.  He contends he would have been selected "due course" as a 70A if his Functional Area had been correct in FY2011.

	f.  the Histograms published by the AMEDD Personnel Proponent Directorate shows PYG 1995 was drastically short 70A and overstrength 67J.  

18.  He was recommended and selected for promotion to LTC by the FY2012 LTC AMEDD Promotion Board.  The promotion board listing indicates his AOC as 67.

19.  Army Regulation 600-8-29 (Officer Promotions) prescribes policies and procedures governing promotion of Army commissioned and warrant offices on the active duty list (ADL).  

	a.  Promotions are a General Staff responsibility of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1 (DCS, G-1).  Selection for and promotion to the grades of major general (MG), brigadier general (BG), colonel (COL), LTC, MAJ, and CPT will be according to sections 611 through 626 and 628, Title 10, USC (10 USC 611 through 626 and 628).  Unless otherwise specified in this regulation, the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) (ASA (M&RA)) is the designee of the Secretary of the Army (SA), pursuant to Headquarters, Department of the Army General Order 24, dated 23 November 1993.

	b.  To be considered for promotion by a selection board, an officer must be on the ADL on the day the board convenes.  For centralized promotions, eligibility is based on an officer's active date of rank (ADOR) and time in grade (TIG).  To the extent permitted by 10 USC 622, promotion zones for Medical or Dental Corps officers will be established to ensure that those in the zone, if selected, will be promoted on the sixth anniversary of their ADOR.  

	c.  Whenever the needs of the service require, the SA will convene selection boards to recommend officers for promotion to the next higher grade.  The boards will select commissioned officers for promotion to CPT, MAJ, LTC, COL, BG, and MG.  A separate selection board will convene for each competitive category and grade for commissioned officers; however, such boards may be convened concurrently.  Officers in the same competitive category will then compete among themselves for promotion. 

	d.  Officers eligible for consideration by a promotion board are personally responsible for reviewing their Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR) and may write to the board to provide documents and information calling attention to any matter concerning themselves that they consider important to their consideration.  Written memoranda sent to a promotion selection board will be considered if received not later than the date the board convenes.

20.  10 USC 622 provides that prior to convening a selection board for any grade and competitive category, the Secretary of the military department concerned, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, shall determine:

		(1)  the number of positions needed to accomplish mission objectives which require officers of such competitive category in the grade to which the board will recommend officers for promotion;

		(2)  the estimated number of officers needed to fill vacancies in such positions during the period in which it is anticipated that officers selected for promotion will be promoted; and

		(3)  the number of officers authorized by the Secretary of the military department concerned to serve on active duty in the grade and competitive category under consideration.  Based on such determinations, the Secretary of the military department concerned shall determine the maximum number of officers in such competitive category which the selection board may recommend for promotion. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The HRC advisory opinion states the applicant was repeatedly advised on the proper procedures to complete an AOC change prior to the FY2011 AMEDD LTC Selection Board.  However, his initial AOC change request lacked the required endorsements.  

2.  Even though the evidence of record shows the applicant requested his primary AOC be changed from 67J to 70A on 2 February 2010 and his immediate commanding officer recommended approval; evidence also shows his application was returned without action because it was lacking the appropriate endorsements from the AOC consultants.  This appears to confirm the advisory opinion’s statements.

3.  He contends his AOC was changed in February 2010 and the process doesn't have a method to officially notify the service member of approval or disapproval of the requested action.  However, his service record is void of evidence which indicates the action was approved in February 2010.  Additionally, the applicant had the responsibility of verifying his AOC when reviewing his AMHRR and Officer Record Brief in preparation for board consideration.  

4.  The applicant states he was required to change his AOC because only those service members in AOC 70A were allowed to compete in the Ph.D. program in Healthcare Administration.  Although he believes he was converted to primary AOC 70A as a result of his selection as an alternate for LTHET, his AOC conversion did not occur prior to the convening dates of the FY2011 LTHET Board and the FY2011 AMEDD LTC Selection Board; accordingly, the results of each board show his primary AOC as 67J.  

5.  The applicant contends he was not selected for promotion to LTC because he was erroneously boarded as a 67J.  However, the reasons for non-selection for promotion are not published.  It cannot be determined whether he was not selected for promotion to LTC for being 67J, which had a ceiling of 5.  

6.  The applicant resubmitted his request on 12 June 2011 to change his primary AOC from 67J to 70A.  However, his request was approved in July 2011, subsequent to the FY2011 LTC AMEDD MSC Promotion Selection Board.  

7.  Although the 70A Consultant indicated she had endorsed the applicant's request to change his primary AOC to 70A in February 2010, the applicant's service record does not include the endorsement and he did not provide her endorsement.   

8.  The applicant contends his AOC change was not completed because of HRC's transition from Alexandria, VA to Fort Knox, KY.  However, the evidence of record does not support his contention.  

9.  Based on the foregoing, there is no basis for amending the applicant's records to show his AOC 70A was changed, effective 2 February 2010.

10.  The applicant's AOC conversion was approved in July 2011 and he was subsequently recommended and selected for promotion to LTC by the FY2012 LTC AMEDD Promotion Board.  In view of the fact that his AOC was not converted prior to the convening date of the FY2011 selection board, there is no basis for reconsideration for promotion to LTC under the FY 2011 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)                                         AR20110020089





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110020089



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1