IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  17 July 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120003324 


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 removal of the following documents from her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF):

* Order Number 060-026, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (AHRC), Fort Knox, KY, dated 1 March 2011
* Memorandum issued by AHRC, subject:  Delay of Promotion and Referral to a Promotion Review Board LTC(P) (applicant's name)
* Memorandum issued by AHRC, subject:  Promotion Review Board Results, dated 3 November 2011

2.  She states the document in her OMPF indicating she was previously removed from the promotion list has been similar to a censure in her record.  Her removal from the promotion list resulted from an Army Regulation 15-6 (Procedures for Investigating Officers and Boards of Officers) investigation.  She was cleared of all wrongdoing, but the investigation was sufficiently politically charged to cause the removal action.  Based on the final decision, this removal from the promotion list was supposed to be without prejudice thereby giving her a fair opportunity to re-compete for promotion at the next colonel (COL)/O-6 promotion board.

3.  She provides no additional documents.  

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  At the time the applicant submitted her application, she was serving on active duty in the rank/grade of lieutenant colonel (LTC)/O-5.
2.  The applicant was appointed as a commissioned officer on 27 May 1987.

3.  She was promoted to major on 10 April 1999 and to LTC on 10 April 2005.

4.  An Army Regulation 15-6 investigation was completed on 17 June 2010 into the reasons for the inclusion of briefing slides that contained images and comments that appeared derogatory to Reserve Component (RC) personnel and the effect of this presentation upon providers to whom it was delivered.  The approving authority approved the findings of the investigating officer and indicated there was no malicious intent or negative impact.

5.  On 28 June 2010, the applicant received a memorandum of admonishment for preparing and presenting a slide show presentation for her staff that contained material deeply offensive to RC Soldiers of the United States.  On the same date, she acknowledged she read and understood the unfavorable information presented against her and she submitted statements in her own behalf.  On 30 June 2010, she accepted the memorandum of admonishment and she indicated she took full responsibility for the actions that led to the memorandum.  She also stated she:

* regretted any perception of disrespect toward the National Guard Soldiers 
* did not intend to be demeaning or to give the impression that they would receive anything less than the outstanding compassionate care they provide to Soldiers of all components
* especially regretted any damage that may have been done to the good reputation of Madigan Army Medical Center and Joint Base Lewis-McChord

6.  On 10 July 2010, a general officer directed the memorandum of admonishment be filed locally in the applicant's file and to be destroyed after
1 year or upon her transfer on permanent change of station orders, separation from military service, or retirement, whichever occurred first.

7.  Order Number 060-026, dated 1 March 2011, indicates she would be promoted to COL/O-6 with an effective date and date of rank of 10 April 2011.

8.  In a memorandum, dated 8 April 2011, the Secretary of the Army directed the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1 to convene a Promotion Review Board to advise him as to whether the applicant's actions and judgment with regard to the briefing at issue call into question her qualifications to serve as a COL.


9.  A memorandum, dated 8 April 2011, noted the applicant was informed by a Department of the Army Promotion Selection Board that recessed on 25 September 2009 that she was recommended for promotion to COL.  She was informed the Secretary of the Army directed her records be referred to a Promotion Review Board to consider whether she should be retained on the Fiscal Year 2009 (FY09), COL Army Medical Corps Promotion List based on an investigation concerning demobilization processing by the Joint Base Lewis-McChord Soldier Readiness Center.

10.  Order Number 0098-059, issued by Headquarters, AHRC, Fort Knox, dated 8 April 2011, revoked Order Number 060-026, dated 1 March 2011, promoting the applicant to COL.  

11.  On 11 April 2011, she elected to submit a rebuttal.

12.  A memorandum, dated 14 July 2011, indicated a board of officers convened on 14 July 2011 at the Department of the Army, Secretariat for Selection Boards, Fort Knox, to consider the case of an officer being referred.  The memorandum indicated the officer recommended for promotion, including those who had adverse information furnished to the board, was in the opinion of the majority of the members of the board, fully qualified and among the best qualified for promotion to meet the needs of the Army consistent with the requirements of exemplary conduct set out in Title 10, U.S. Code, section 3583.

13.  In an undated Action Memorandum, the Promotion Review Board (Report Number Axxxx-07), recommended the applicant be retained on the FY09, COL, Medical Corps Army Promotion Selection List.  This recommendation was in accordance with the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-29 (Officer Promotions) and the board's Memorandum of Instruction.

14.  On 2 November 2011, the Secretary of the Army directed the applicant be removed from the FY09 COL, Medical Corps and Dental Corps Promotion Selection List under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, section 629(a), Executive Order 12396 and Army Regulation 600-8-29, paragraph 8-1b.

15.  In a memorandum, dated 3 November 2011, the applicant was informed that the Secretary of the Army decided to remove her name from the FY09 COL, Army, Medical Corps Promotion List.  She was informed in accordance with
Title 10, U.S. Code. section 629.

16.  A review of the applicant's interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) record revealed:


	a.  Order Number 060-026, dated 1 March 2011, promoting her to COL and Order Number 098-059, dated 8 April 2011, revoking her promotion orders are filed in the service section of her OMPF.

	b.  The memorandum, dated 8 April 2011, notifying her of the Promotion Review Board and memorandum, dated 3 November 2011, indicating she was removed from the COL promotion list and all related documents are filed in the restricted section of her OMPF.

17.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/
Records) prescribes the policies governing the OMPF, the military personnel records jacket, the career management individual file, and Army Personnel Qualification Records.  Paragraph 2-4 of this regulation states that once a document is placed in the OMPF it becomes a permanent part of that file and will not be removed from that file or moved to another part of the file unless directed by the ABCMR; DASEB; Army Appeals Board; Chief of Appeals and Corrections Branch, AHRC; OMPF custodian when documents have been improperly filed; Chief of the Appeals Branch of the Army Reserve Personnel Center; and the Chief of the Appeals Branch of the National Guard Personnel Center.

18.  Army Regulation 600-8-104, Table 2-1 states:

	a.  Documents pertaining to removal from promotion list will be filed in the restricted section of the OMPF.

	b.  promotion or reduction orders will be filed in the service computation section of the OMPF.

	c.  correspondence to special selection, promotion advisory, promotion review, or standby advisory boards authorizing a member's records to appear before the board will be filed in the service section and allied documents will be filed in the restricted section of the OMPF.

19.  Army Regulation 600-8-29, paragraph 8-1b states that under the provisions of Title 10 U.S. Code, section 629(a), the President, or his designee, may remove the name of an officer, in a rank/grade above second lieutenant (2LT)/
O-1, from a list of officers recommended for promotion by a selection board.  This authority has been delegated to the Secretary of the Army.  A Promotion 
Review Board is used to advise the Secretary of the Army in any case in which there is cause to believe that a commissioned officer on a promotion list is mentally, physically, morally, or professionally unqualified or unsuited to perform the duties of the grade for which he or she was selected for promotion.

20.  Army Regulation 600-37 (Unfavorable Information) sets forth policies and procedures to authorize placement of unfavorable information about Army members in individual official personnel files.  Paragraph 7-2 (Policies and Standards) states, in pertinent part, that once an official document has been properly filed in the OMPF, it is presumed to be administratively correct and to have been filed pursuant to an objective decision by competent authority.  Thereafter, the burden of proof rests with the individual concerned to provide evidence of a clear and convincing nature that the document is untrue or unjust, in whole or in part, thereby warranting its alteration or removal from the OMPF.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention regarding removal of her promotion orders to COL and the derogatory information relating to her removal from the COL/O-6 promotion list from her OMPF have been carefully reviewed.  However, her service record is void of evidence, and she has not provided any evidence, that indicates an error or injustice exists in this case.

2.  The applicant was recommended for promotion to COL by the FY09 COL Army Medical Corps Selection Board.

3.  The evidence of record shows she underwent an Army Regulation 15-6 investigation on 17 June 2010 into the reason for the inclusion of briefing slides that contained images and comments that appeared derogatory to RC Soldiers and the effect of this presentation upon providers to whom it was delivered.  The approving authority approved the findings of the investigating officer and indicated there was no malicious intent or negative impact of the contents of the slides.

4.  However, the applicant received a memorandum of admonishment for her actions and she accepted and took full responsibility for the actions that led to the issuance of the memorandum.

5.  Order Number 060-026 promoted her to COL with an effective date and date of rank of 10 April 2011.

6.  After the applicant's records were reviewed by a Promotion Review Board, the Secretary of the Army determined the applicant would be removed from the promotion list.  

7.  The applicant's service record revealed the following documents were properly filed in her OMPF in accordance with applicable regulations:

	a.  Order Number 060-026, dated 1 March 2011, promoting her to COL/O-6 with an effective date and date of rank of 10 April 2011 (service section);

	b.  A memorandum, dated 8 April 2011, indicating her records were referred to a Promotion Review Board to consider whether she should be retained on the FY09, COL Army Medical Corps Promotion List based on an investigation concerning demobilization processing by the Joint Base Lewis-McChord Soldier Readiness Center (restricted section);

	c.  Order Number 0098-059, dated 8 April 2011, revoking Order Number
060-026, dated 1 March 2011, promoting her to COL (service section).

	d.  A memorandum, dated 3 November 2011, notifying her that the Secretary of the Army decided to remove her name from the FY09 COL, Army, Medical Corps Promotion List (restricted section).

8.  Her service record is void of evidence that indicates her removal from the promotion list has affected her opportunity to re-compete for promotion to COL.

9.  By regulation, an official document that has been properly filed in the OMPF is presumed to be administratively correct and to have been filed pursuant to an objective decision by competent authority.  Thereafter, the burden of proof rests with the individual concerned to provide evidence of a clear and convincing nature that the documents are untrue or unjust thereby warranting their removal from the OMPF.

10.  Since the applicant has not provided evidence to show the documents were filed in error or unjust, there is an insufficient evidentiary 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)                                         AR20120003324



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120003324



7


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1