IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  29 July 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130019577 


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.  removal of a DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 2 July 2012, from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF); and

	b.  that his case be reviewed by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for promotion to captain (CPT).  

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  the DA Form 1059 was placed unfairly in the interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) on 2 July 2012.

	b.  he arrived at Fort Sam Houston, TX on 7 July 2012 for the Basic Officer Leaders Course (BOLC).  By his own admission, he did not pass the height and weight standards.  However, according to the memorandum that was sent out prior to attending the class, the height/weight standards must be met by the course graduation date.  He asked for additional tapings on 18 June 2012 and on 29 June 2012, but both requests were denied.  He was told that after returning to his unit at Fort Jackson, SC, and passing the height/weight taping, the flag would be removed and the class would be considered as passing.

	c.  on graduation day (2 July 2012), he received a certificate of successful completion of BOLC and a stamped letter from the Surgeon General.

	d.  even though he successfully passed the taping, the class continued to show unsuccessful in the Army Training Requirements and Resources System and the DA Form 1059 is in his OMPF.   

	e.  he is requesting that a new Academic Evaluation Report be placed in iPERMS to show he successfully completed BOLC.

	f.  in addition, he is requesting his case be considered by an SSB for promotion to CPT.

3.  The applicant provides:

* Memorandum for the BOLC
* Diploma for BOLC
* Certificate from the Surgeon General
* Two DA Forms 5500 (Body Fat Content Worksheet)
 
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was appointed a first lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 19 November 2010.  
 
2.  The DA Form 1059 in question shows he attended the BOLC at Fort Sam Houston, TX, from 8 June through 2 July 2012.  The form shows in:

	a.  Item 11 (Performance Summary) he failed to achieve course standards.

	b.  Item 12c (Leadership Skills) he was rated UNSAT (unsatisfactory).

	c.  Item 14 (Comments) shows the following comments:

		(1)  Officer received an "UNSAT" in Leadership Skills due to failing height and weight standards, Leadership Skills are evaluated as a combination of demonstrated skills while in leadership/staff positions in both garrison and field environment and also the officer's ability to meet designated physical standards IAW (in accordance with) Army Regulation (AR) 350-1 (Army Training and Leader Development) and AR 600-9 (The Army Body Composition Program).  His records were flagged and he was placed in the Army Weight Control Program.

		(2)  This officer met all course academic and field training standards.

3.  He provides a diploma from the U.S. Army Medical Department Center and School, Academy of Health Sciences, at Fort Sam Houston, TX which shows he successfully completed the Reserve Component - BOLC for the period 8 June 2012 to 2 July 2012. 

4.  In November 2012, he was considered, but not selected for promotion to CPT.

5.  He provides a DA Form 5500, dated 18 November 2012, which shows he was in compliance with Army Standards.

6.  In May 2013, he was notified he was considered twice for promotion to CPT by the Army Reserve Components Selection Board and not selected.

7.  He provides a DA Form 5500, dated 19 May 2013, which shows he was in compliance with Army Standards.

8.  On 1 October 2013, he was honorably discharged from the USAR due to being two-time non-select for promotion to CPT.

9.  Officials at the Operations Section, BOLC, Fort Sam Houston, TX revealed:

* the applicant failed the height/weight standards during BOLC and failed the course
* he was given a diploma/certificate in error

10.  A review of the applicant's performance section of his OMPF on the iPERMS revealed a copy of the contested DA Form 1059.

11.  Army Regulation 623-3 (Evaluation Reporting System) states an evaluation report accepted by Headquarters, Department of the Army and included in the official record of a rated Soldier is presumed to be administratively correct; have 
been prepared by the properly designated rating officials; and represent the considered opinions and objective judgment of the rating officials at the time of preparation.  Requests that an evaluation report in a Soldier's OMPF be altered, withdrawn, or replaced with another report will not be honored.  The regulation also states that the burden of proof rests with the applicant.  Accordingly, to justify deletion or amendment of a report, the applicant will produce evidence that clearly and convincingly establishes that:

	a.  the presumption of regularity referred to in paragraphs 3-39 and 6-7 will not be applied to the report under consideration; and

	b.  action is warranted to correct a material error, inaccuracy, or injustice.
12.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Army Military Human Resource Records Management) prescribes the policies governing the OMPF.  It states a DA Form 1059 will be filed in the performance section of the OMPF

13.  Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officer Other than General Officers) prescribes the policies and procedures for promotion of Reserve officers.  This regulation specifies that promotion reconsideration by an SSB may only be based on erroneous non-consideration or material error which existed in the record at the time of consideration.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends the DA Form 1059 was unfairly placed in iPERMS.  However, the evidence shows he failed the height/weight standards during BOLC and failed the course.  Officials at the Operations Section, BOLC, Fort Sam Houston, TX confirmed that he failed the course and was given a diploma in error.

2.  There is insufficient evidence to show the markings and comments from his instructor/rater were in error on the contested DA Form 1059.

3.  The contested DA Form 1059 is properly filed in the performance section of the applicant's OMPF in accordance with the governing regulation.  There is no evidence it was improperly prepared or filed.

4.  His request for promotion consideration to CPT by an SSB was carefully considered.  However, the evidence shows he was considered, but non-selected for promotion to CPT twice.  He has provided insufficient evidence to show he should be considered for promotion to CPT by an SSB.  

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)                                         AR20130019577



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130019577



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1