IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  3 December 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140008758 


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 adjustment of his effective date of promotion to lieutenant colonel (LTC) in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), to the date his records went before the promotion board a second time.  In effect, he requests promotion consideration to LTC by a special selection board (SSB). 

2.  The applicant states he is requesting to have his effective date of promotion to LTC adjusted to the date when his records went before the promotion board a second time.  He cannot determine the exact date that his promotion would have taken place, but he believes the window is January-April 2010, assuming he would have been selected for promotion on his second look.  The reason he is requesting this correction is as follows:

	a.  He was educationally qualified for promotion to LTC when he completed the National War College (NWC) resident course in 2007.  At that time, given his commissioning year, the NWC degree completion was sufficient to meet the Intermediate Level Education (ILE) attendance requirement for promotion consideration to LTC, and no other documentation was required in his board file. He confirmed this by regulation and with three separate career managers in 2007 and prior to his two promotion boards.  After being passed over for promotion, he inquired as to the reason or possible missing documentation.  Both times, he was told his file was not coded as educationally qualified, due to the absence of an ILE certificate – this despite having his NWC diploma in his file along with a Military Education Level (MEL)-1 rating.  Also, despite working at the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) as a public affairs officer, and conducting multiple face-to-face discussions, no one could tell him how to get his record coded correctly.  
	
	b.  He was eventually passed to Ms. Mc----ry, Army G-3/5/7.  She originally told him that he needed a TLO (Terminal Learning Objective) crosswalk to demonstrate equivalent ILE experience.  Constructing the ILE crosswalk is an arduous and time-consuming process, as one must demonstrate their experience at every level of ILE.  Although under contest because he felt this was a distinct deviation from the regulation, he completed the crosswalk and eventually received an ILE constructive credit memorandum on 11 April 2013.  However, prior to receiving the memo and after further review of his case, Ms. Mc----ry acknowledged that there was an error and that the constructive credit was not required.  Despite a regulation change after 2007, he was grandfathered due to his 1993 year group and 2007 NWC graduation.  Ms. Mc----ry also provided the language, which he understood it to mean if he were a year later in either category, he would have required ILE-Common Core (ILE-CC) attendance.  Although very frustrated, he understood how this confusion could arise, but in the mean time his career was, and is, being unduly harmed.  The constructive credit issue was also overcome by events because the ILE-CC was already issued and posted in his file. 

	c.  Following this action, he requested promotion consideration by an SSB through HRC; however, they denied his request stating that they can only give consideration based on what was in his board file at the time and he was not coded educationally qualified.  He explained and provided documentation from the Army G-3/5/7 that the ILE–CC, although present, was not required.  They said they understood and referred him to this Board for adjudication.  Because he had exhausted every other avenue, his chain of command at the time could not offer any relief and therefore recommended that he speak with the Inspector General (IG).  The IG reviewed the case and stated: "HRC does not have the authority to interpret the original memorandum he received from Army G-3/5/7 in any other way except as it is written.  On 11 April 2013, the Army G-3/5/7 granted you constructive credit - not retroactive.  As such, there are no grounds for HRC to grant your request for an SSB.  Your best and fastest option is to call the point of contact (Ms. Mc----ry) and ask that the phrase "retroactive to the date of graduation" be inserted in the new memorandum.  Once HRC receives this new memorandum in his request, they will grant him an SSB."

	d.  He contacted Ms. Mc----ry and told her what was recommended.  She reiterated that the ILE-CC was not the issue; it was not required, and therefore she was not going to backdate it and potentially create a validation of a document that was not required in the first place.  In effect and through no fault of his own, he was being unfairly held to a different and changing administrative standard due to lack of understanding of the regulations and requirements.  

	e.  In the end, he was eventually coded educationally qualified, he placed a letter to the promotion board president in his file explaining his situation, and he was promoted on 16 April 2014.  Every person involved in this action agreed that it was administratively irregular and unfair at best, and more likely an undue hardship to him and his career.  All, to include the IG and the Army National Guard (ARNG) Liaison at HRC, suggested he take his case to the ABCMR in order to correct the record.  He is not confident that he can fully recover from the deleterious effects of this action on his career.  It has not only delayed a deserved and timely promotion, but it also prevented him from being placed and rated in assignments of greater responsibility because he was a two-time pass over.  Having said this, a correction to his date of rank (DOR) will provide some level of mitigation to his career.  

3.  The applicant provides:

* Letter to the promotion board president, dated 23 December “2014” 
(i.e., 2013) 
* G-3/5/7 approval of ILE constructive credit
* National Defense University (NDU) Form 64B, NDU evaluation report
* Diploma from NDU-NWC
* Officer Record Brief
* DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action)
* Email exchange with Ms Mc----ry
* Email exchange with the HRC IG
* Email exchange with HRC promotion branch

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was born in December 1966 and served in the ARNG in an enlisted status. 

2.  He was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer of the VAARNG and executed an oath of office on 24 July 1993.  He completed the Infantry Officer Basic Course and the Infantry Officer Advanced Course/Captain's Career Course.  He was promoted to captain (CPT) on 10 February 2000. 

3.  He completed the Combined Arms and Services Staff School in 2003.  He was promoted to major (MAJ) in the ARNG on 4 April 2005.  

4.  He attended The National War College from 7 August 2006 to 7 June 2007 as a civilian, and on 7 June 2007, he was awarded a Master of Science in National Security Strategy from NDU.

5.  He was separated from the ARNG on 1 October 2008 and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR).  

6.  On 11 March 2009, he was assigned to HRC, where he performed the duties of a Public Affairs Officer.  On 10 November 2011, he was reassigned to the USAR Control Group (Individual Mobilization Augmentee).

7.  On 31 May 2012, HRC notified him that he was identified as being a 
non-graduate of ILE.  He was advised that if he had his DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) that confirmed his attendance at ILE, he should forward the document to HRC for inclusion in his records. 

8.  On 2 August 2012, HRC notified him of his current non-military education qualification for promotion to LTC.  He was also furnished a power-point explanation of ILE enrollment stressing that he only had 4 months to complete all three phases of ILE-CC, which was the stated requirement for promotion to LTC. He was advised that the Fiscal Year 2012 (FY12) board results would be out soon and the FY13 board would convene on 8 January 2013.  Failure to have the required military education would decrease his potential for promotion.  He was further informed if he had a copy of the DA Form 1059, he should get it filed in his official records and if he had not yet completed the education, he should enroll. 

9.  On 18 October 2012, HRC issued him a Notification of Eligibility for Retired Pay at Age 60 (20-Year Letter). 

10.  On 20 February 2013, he submitted a DA Form 4187 requesting ILE constructive credit based on his education and experience.  He stated he completed ILE-CC on (he left the date blank) or he understood he must complete ILE-CC to receive Joint Professional Military Education (JPME)-1/MEL-4 credit.  He indicated 4 enclosures were enclosed: 

* TLO Crosswalk
* DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record)
* Transcripts - Graduate Studies
* Officer Evaluation Reports
* Current Army Physical Fitness Test and height/weight statement

11.  On 11 April 2013, the Director of Training, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3/5/7 approved his request for ILE constructive credit and instructed HRC to update his record with JPME/MEL-4 credit. 

12.  On 2 May 2014, HRC published Orders B-05-402072, which promoted him to LTC with an effective date and DOR of 16 April 2014.  He was selected by the FY13 Promotion Selection Board. 

13.  On 23 May 2014, he was reassigned from the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) to the Standby Reserve (Inactive List) after having failed to make a military service obligation selection. 

14.  An advisory opinion was received from the HRC Officer Promotions Branch. An advisory official recommended disapproval of his request for an SSB under an earlier year criteria.  

	a.  The applicant's request for ILE constructive credit was not approved until 11 April 2013.  Although he claims he was educationally qualified earlier, the documentation notes that he did attend the National War College in a civilian capacity, as a civilian employee.  He was informed via email, telephonically, and in person that HRC is not the authority to grant credit for the Military Education Courses and that he should seek assistance through the appropriate authority for issues with the date of this document. 

	b.  He was also informed by HRC IG that HRC could not grant him an SSB due to the date of the approved constructive credit document.  In HRC's last contact with him on 6 June 2013, he was informed to seek assistance through the ABCMR.  

15.  He responded to the advisory opinion on 30 August 2014.  He stated: 

	a.  The advisory opinion actually further supports his position in this case.  It cites the ILE constructive credit memo as the basis for considering him educationally qualified.  Again, per the regulations and the ruling of the Army G3/5/7 office, this is a gross error.  ILE constructive credit was never a requirement for him to be educationally qualified.  The only qualification for a 2007 NWC graduate was to provide the graduation certificate which has been in his personnel file since 2007.  This was further confirmed by two consecutive promotions officer and career manager from HRC in 2008 and 2009.  As such, the promotions board has held him to an unfair standard causing undue hardship to him and his career.

	b.  The advisory official states HRC is not the authority to grant credit for military education - this is very misleading because they are the office that marks the file educationally qualified.  He knows this because they pulled his command board file in June 2014, because he was again ruled educationally unqualified by an HRC officer.  He had to contact the office to get them to reverse this error and he has the email documentation to support this.  The requirement to be educationally qualified was graduation of the NWC in 2007 or prior, and to provide the graduation certificate.  All of these requirements were satisfied, yet the advisory official refused to mark his file as educationally qualified.  

	c.  The advisory official is correct about contact with his office and the IG's office.  He did this at the direction of his leadership, but this too, is misleading.  First, the IG based his decision on an ILE constructive credit memo being a requirement - and again it is not.  Second, he does not reference the opinions of the Army G-3/5/7, nor the two previous officers - promotions and career manager – who stated that the graduation certificate was all that was needed.  In addition, this communication referenced by the advisory official took place in 2013, well after he had been a two-time non-select for promotion.

	d.  Of additional concern to him is the advisory official's reference to his attendance at the National War College in a civilian capacity and even emphasizing it with parenthesis.  This is simply not germane to his case because the requirements and credit are the same for both military and civilian.  If they were not, he would not have been promoted today.  These otherwise irrelevant references concern him because it sets the impression that the advisory official and/or his office staff may have allowed a bias to influence their judgment against him in this case simply because he successfully completed the requirement in a civilian status. 

17.  Military Personnel (MILPER) Messages, numbered below, Subject: FYXX LTC Army Promotion List (APL), Army Reserve Active Guard Reserve (AR-AGR), Army Reserve Non-Active Guard Reserve (AR Non-AGR), and ARNG Competitive Categories, Promotion Selection Board) announced promotion board criteria as follows: 

	a.  MILPER Message 11-182, dated 10 June 2011, FY11 LTC APL, convened on or about 7 September 2011, Above the Zone (AZ) date of rank (DOR) (ARNG) 31 March 2005 and earlier, promotion Zone (PZ) 1 April 2005 through 31 March 2006.  Military education requirements must be completed no later than the day before the board convenes.  Evidence must be included in the military board file. Military education requirements to MAJ is 50 percent completion of the command and general staff officer course or completion of the logistics executive development course or associate logistics executive development course or current enrollment or completion of a resident ILE or completion of any ILE-CC.  Evidence of completion is the Academic Evaluation Report or DA Form 1059 or diploma.  Officers not educationally qualified will not be selected for promotion. 

	b.  MILPER Message 12-043, dated 15 February 2012, FY12 LTC APL, convened on or about 30 May 2012, AZ DOR 31 March 2006 and earlier, PZ DOR 1 April 2006 to 31 March 2007.  Military education requirements are the same as the previous message. 

	c.  MILPER Message 12-313, dated 1 October 2012, FY13 LTC APL, convened on or about 8 January 2013, AZ DOR 31 March 2007 and earlier, PZ DOR 1 April 2007 to 31 March 2008.  Military education requirements are the same as the previous message. 

	d.  MILPER Message 13-292, dated 10 October 2013, FY14 LTC APL, convened on or about 13 January 2014, AZ DOR 31 March 2008 and earlier, PZ DOR 1 April 2008 to 31 March 2009.  Military education requirements are the same as the previous message. 

18.  Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Directive, dated 15 December 2011, pertaining to Officer Professional Military Education, and Army pertinent regulations, identified five levels of JPME as defined by the Officer Professional Military Education Policy.  

* Pre-commissioning: Military education received at institutions and through programs producing commissioned officers upon graduation; examples are Reserve Officers' Training program and Officer Candidate School.
* Primary Education typically received at grades O-1 through O-3; branch, warfare, and or staff specialty schools 
* Intermediate Education typically received at grade O-4; normally Army Command and General Staff College or sister services as well as service-recognized equivalent fellowships, advanced military schools, and international military colleges; or joint schools 
* Senior Education typically received at grades O-5 or O-6; service senior professional education (Army War College, Air War College); service-recognized equivalent fellowships, advanced military schools and international military colleges; and Joint Senior JPME Institutions (National War College)
* General/Flag Officer (G/FO) Education received as a G/FO

19.  Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, Memorandum, dated 27 October 2009 (and the previous memorandum, dated 7 August 2002), Subject: Officer Selection Board Policy Branch, identifies the various MELs:
	a.  MEL-1 indicates Senior Service College (SSC) graduate; MEL-2 indicates SSC selectee; MEL-3 indicates corresponding studies course (first year); MEL-4 indicates Command/Staff College (CSC) or ILE graduate; MEL-5 indicates CSC/ILE selectee; and MEL-6 indicates officer advanced course graduate. 

	b.  For the purpose of CSC/ILE, any one of the following schools: the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, the U.S. College of Naval Command and Staff, the U.S. Air Command and Staff College, the U.S. Marine Corps Command and Staff College, the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation Command & General Staff Officer Course (WHINSEC-CGSOC), or foreign military staff colleges which have been granted MEL-4 equivalency by the DCS, G-3.

	c.  For the purpose of SSC, any one of the following schools: the U.S. AWC, the National War College, the Industrial College of the Armed Forces, the Naval War College, the Air War College, approved SSC Fellowship, or foreign military SSCs that have been granted MEL-1 equivalency by DCS, G-3/5/7.

	d.  ILE refers to the third tier of the Officer Education System and is linked directly to Army Transformation.  Under ILE, officers attend schooling and subsequently receive assignments based on the needs of their respective career field, branch, and functional area.  ILE includes completion of the common-core curriculum and the required career field, branch, and functional area training and education.  ILE prepares field grade officers with a warrior ethos and warfighting focus for leadership in Army, joint, multinational, and interagency organizations executing full spectrum of operations designed to prepare senior captains and majors for leadership positions in Army, joint, multinational and interagency organizations.  Previously known as CGSC, ILE consists of a common core curriculum that includes JPME-1 requirements and the required branch and/or functional area specialized education or qualification course.  Successful completion of ILE CC and the respective qualification course is required for award of JPME Phase I credit.  ILE is a MEL Level 4 accredited course.  The course is divided into three phases, which are taken consecutively:

		(1).  Phase I is a hands-on, execution-oriented course where a staff group develops and applies critical thinking skills.  This two-week block introduces staff officers to the highly-complex joint environments our forces encounter today.

		(2)  Phase II, conducted one weekend a month develops the students' advanced communicative skills (collaboration, consensus building, coordinating, facilitating, writing and presenting), while using the Military Decision Making Process within the Learning Environment.
		(3)  Phase III, another two-week block that focuses on war fighting functions, culminating with an application exercise in which the students demonstrate their understanding of tactical fundamentals.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  MILPER Messages periodically announce the eligibility criteria for each promotion board.  This includes the date of rank, civilian and military education, officer evaluation reports, and other requirements.  In the applicant's case, he held the rank of MAJ.  Eligibility requirement for promotion to LTC required him to be ILE qualified.  He was not. 

2.  Although he completed the National War College in 2007, he was still not ILE qualified.  There would have been one way to be ILE qualified:  attend and successfully complete ILE-CC.  He never did.  Instead, he attended the National War College and did so as a civilian.  While there is no provision to prevent a member from attending the National War College in a civilian status, in order to receive credit on his military records, he would have had to request constructive credit.  The fact that he completed a higher JPME course does not automatically entitle him to a lower course.   

3.  He requested constructive credit in February 2013 and his request was approved by the Director of Training on 11 April 2013.  It is then and only then that his military records were coded with JPME/MEL-4 credit.  He contends that because he is year group 1993 and was not required to complete ILE, he should be entitled to an SSB.  His contention is without merit.  The military education requirement is clearly stated in each MILPER Message and he was not exempt from this requirement.  

4.  Because there is no material error in his records, an SSB is not warranted.  He is not entitled to 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 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)                                         AR20140008758





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140008758



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1