IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  19 February 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140010278 


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.  This applicant requests, in effect, constructive credit for the Advanced Operations Course (AOC).

2.  The applicant states in accordance with a National Guard Bureau (NGB) Memorandum, dated 16 May 2013, Subject: Request for Review of Officer Assignment History for ARNG (Army National Guard) Consolidated Constructive Credit for AOC, he should receive credit.  He believes his key development (KD) positions and experience were overlooked and he was not given constructive credit for the AOC.  The NGB Training Division reviewed the Wyoming ARNG submission packet on two occasions but did not grant credit and no explanation or reason was given. 

3.  The applicant provides:

* NGB Memorandum, dated 16 May 2013, Subject: Request for Review of Officer Assignment History for ARNG Consolidated Constructive Credit for AOC
* Officer Evaluation Reports (OER) from 31 May 2007 through 15 January 2012
* Army G-1 Memorandum, dated 28 October 2013, Subject: Request for Command and General Staff Officer Course (CGSOC) AOC Constructive Credit for Commissioned Year 1994-2003 ARNG Officers 
* NGB Memorandum, dated 13 September 2013, Subject: Intermediate  Level Education (ILE) Constructive Credit Recommendation 
* Army G-3 Approved AOC Constructive Credit Roster of ARNG Officers by State 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer of the Colorado ARNG (COARNG) and executed an oath of office on 12 May 1995.  He completed the Military Police (MP) Officer Basic Course.  

2.  He resigned from the ARNG and was honorably separated from the COARNG on 1 December 1998.  He was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement). 

3.  He executed an oath of office in the WYARNG on 15 September 2000.  He served in a variety of assignments, with multiple periods of mobilization on active duty, and he was promoted to major (MAJ) in February 2007 and lieutenant colonel (LTC) in April 2012.  

4.  He completed the MP Officer Advanced Reserve Course in October 2005 and the U.S. Army CGSOC, ILE Common Core, between 14 August 2009 and 24 February 2011.  

5.  He entered active duty on multiple occasions as follows: 

* 30 March 2005 to 26 June 2007
* 20 August 2007 to 15 August 2008
* 16 August 2008 to 14 April 2009
* 15 April 2009 to 12 May 2010 (he served in Kuwait from 20090702-20100323) 

6.  He received multiple OERs for various reasons during the following periods of service in the WYARNG: 

* 20070531-20070903, Executive Officer (XO), 94th Troop Command
* 20070904-20080414, S-3, 960th Brigade Support Battalion (BSB)  
* 20080415-20090414, S-3, 960th BSB 
* 20090415-20100731, S-3, 960th BSB (Kuwait)
* 20100801-20110731, Battalion XO, 960th BSB
* 20110801-20120115, Battalion XO, 960th BSB

7.  On 15 May 2013, the NGB issued guidance to all states and territories regarding a review of officer assignment history of ARNG consolidated constructive credit for AOC.  
	a.  On 19 September 2012, the Director of Training, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G3/G7 granted constructive credit for AOC to active component officers based on the officer's successful completion of a KD assignment.  The ARNG is pursuing a similar constructive credit request for eligible ARNG officers and requests the State/Territory's assistance in compiling a list of officers who meet the criteria outlined below.

	b.  A KD assignment is one that is deemed fundamental to the development of an officer in his or her core branch or functional area competencies or deemed critical by the senior Army leadership to provide experience across the Army's strategic mission.  The majority of these positions fall within the scope of the officer's branch or functional area mission.  KDs include, but are not limited to, those positions that are listed as such in DA Pamphlet 600-3 (Commissioned Officers Professional Development and Career Management).  Due to the unique structure and mission of the ARNG, not all of the assignments that could be considered as KD are accounted for in DA Pamphlet 600-3.

	c.  The ARNG will submit the constructive credit request for officers who have not completed an AOC credentialing course in the grades of O-4 or O-5 who were commissioned between 1994-2003 and have either served successfully in a field grade KD position at battalion, brigade, or higher level for 24 months (cumulative) or served successfully in a field grade KD position at battalion, brigade, or higher level for 12 months (consecutive) which includes at least 
6 months served in a deployed combat environment.  

	d.  States/Territories must submit The Adjutant General request memo, roster of the officers in their State/Territory that meet the criteria outlined above, and OERs for the timeframes outlined.

	e.  The Officer Policy Branch will receive the State/Territory requests, verify eligibility (in conjunction with ARNG-Training Branch), consolidate and compile the request, submit the request to ARNG-Training, and publish guidance on the final disposition of the request.  ARNG Training will staff the consolidated request for the ARNG's signature and forward to Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) G3/5/7 for final determination.

8.  On 28 October 2013, by memorandum to Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3/5/7, the NGB Chief of Training Division indicated that a total of 500 of the 1,133 files reviewed by the ARNG met the specific criteria for ILE constructive credit.  The names of the officers being recommended to receive constructive credit for ILE AOC were enclosed. 

9.  On 28 October 2013, the Director of Training, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3/5/7, HQDA, approved the recommendation to grant ILE AOC constructive credit to the 500 commission year 1994-2003 officers listed on the NGB list.  Officers approved for CGSOC AOC constructive credit met at least one of the following criteria: served successfully in a MAJ level KD position for a minimum of 18 months as of 1 February 2013 or served at least 12 months in a MAJ level KD position at battalion or brigade level, or assistant brigade, division, corps staff position in a deployed combat environment. 

10.  An advisory opinion was received from the NGB on 19 November 2014 in the processing of this case.  An advisory official recommended disapproval of the applicant's request.  He stated: 

	a.  The applicant states that discovery of the alleged error was on 1 May 2014 when his AOC packet was returned twice, without approval, to the WYARNG by the NGB Training Division, in accordance with NGB Memo, SUBJECT:  Request for Review of Officer Assignment History for ARNG Consolidated Constructive Credit for Advanced Operations Course, with a suspense date of 15 May 2013. 

	b.  His AOC packet was received, processed, boarded, and disapproved by the NGB Training Division. Memorandum for Director of Training, Deputy Chief of Staff, G3/5/7 (DAMO­ TR), SUBJECT:  Intermediate Level Education (ILE) Constructive Credit recommendation, dated 13 September 2013, does not identify the applicant as a qualified AOC candidate.

	c.  A memorandum from Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3/6/7, SUBJECT:  Request for CGSOC AOC Constructive Credit for Commission Year 1994-2003 ARNG officers, dated 28 October 2013, endorses the previously mentioned memorandum. 

	d.  The WYARNG has not responded to this opinion.

11.  The applicant responded with a rebuttal on 5 December 2014.  He stated:

	a.  He understands the NGB Training Division did receive, process, board, and disapprove the WYARNG's submission of an AOC constructive credit request.  However, he submits that he has actually met the constructive credit criteria and substantiated his stance with the OERs and Officer Record Brief (ORB) submitted with his initial request.  



	b.  The OERs and ORB submitted to the Board document his performance in the Battalion S3 and XO positions, including deployed time, in excess of the constructive credit criteria.  Therefore, he formally requests that he be granted AOC constructive credit.

12.  DA Pamphlet 600-3 serves primarily as a professional development guide for all officers.  It describes the full spectrum of developmental opportunities an officer can expect for a successful career.  It also serves as a mentoring tool for leaders at all levels and is an important personnel management guide for assignment officers, proponents, and HQDA selection board members.  Its focus is the development and career management of all officers of the U.S. Army.  Chapter 15 pertains to MP Branch.  Paragraph 15-3 identifies MP branch officer key development.  At the MAJ level, KD developmental assignments include MP battalion S3 or XO, MP brigade S3 or XO, Criminal Investigation Command (CID) battalion/group S3 or XO, deputy division Provost Marshal (PM), installation deputy Director of Emergency Services or PM (when authorized major or higher), brigade/division MP Planner, OPMG staff officer and Regional Corrections Facility or CID Field Office commander (when authorized a major). 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The AOC educates and trains field grade leaders to serve as staff officers and commanders with the ability to build teams, lead organizations and integrate unified land operations with joint, interagency, intergovernmental, and multinational partners in complex and uncertain environments.  The Army, and the NGB, announced the criteria and mechanism for submitting requests for constructive credit for commissioned officers. 

2.  The applicant submitted his constructive credit AOC packet through the WYARNG to the NGB.  Constructive credit (basic criteria) is granted to officers who completed 18 months of KD time at the battalion/brigade level as a major or who deployed for 12 months as a major either in a battalion/brigade level KD position or in a major’s position at the assistant brigade/division/corps level.  There are other criteria such as education, experience, justification, height and weight, Army Physical Fitness Test, endorsement by the State ARNG (for ARNG officers), OERs, ORB, and terminal learning objective (TLO) crosswalk (how an officer's experience satisfies each AOC TLO). 





3.  KD positions are specified by branch or functional area and are revised periodically.  A KD position is one that is deemed fundamental to the development of an officer in his or her core branch or functional area competencies or deemed critical by the senior Army leadership to provide experience across the Army's strategic mission.  The majority of these positions fall within the scope of the officer's branch or functional area mission.

4.  The NGB received, processed, and conducted a screening of the applicant's AOC constructive credit packet but determined he did not meet the criteria.  As a result, his packet was not forwarded to the Army G-3 for consideration in 2013.  Nevertheless, an officer who was not selected can still apply for constructive credit.  The Army G-3 has a process in place to request constructive credit and receive constructive credit even though an officer is not KD complete.  Constructive credit has always been an option and will continue to be in the future.  The Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3/5/7 approves all requests for constructive credit in accordance with Army Regulation 350-1.  

5.  Assignment officers conducted an initial scrub of eligible officer files for the first iteration of constructive credit.  At the time, the NGB determined the applicant did not meet the criteria.  Nevertheless, there will be future file reviews for officers that later complete the criteria.  Officers can also submit individual packets through their chain of command and/or assignment officer (for active Army) and NGB (for ARNG officers) that correlates their experience to specific training and required learning outcomes that are part of the ILE-AOC curriculum. 

6.  The applicant has not shown an error or an injustice and as such, he is not entitled to the requested relief.  The previous determination made by the NGB does not prevent the applicant from submitting a request for constructive credit while adhering to the screening process of the NGB.  

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)                                         AR20140010278



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140010278



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1