Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | AR20140009522
Original file (AR20140009522.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  27 January 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140009522 


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 consideration by the Fiscal Year 2015 (FY15) U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) General Officer Assignment Advisory Board (GOAAB) and General Officer Promotion Selection Board (GOPSB). 

2.  The applicant states after their latest corrections of internal mistakes, the GOAAB board team had him currently categorized as ineligible due to age.  He was told he is 7 months too old.  He wants the Board to grant him relief and direct the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) to include him in the "considered" population for the FY15 USAR GOAAB/GOPSB.  He adds: 

	a.  In 2011, he graduated from the U.S. Army War College and competed for the FY12 GOAAB.  The GOAAB acknowledged receipt of all his necessary documents and he had a complete packet for that board.  In 2012, he volunteered to leave his solo private law practice and deployed to Afghanistan from August 2012 to September 2013.  Prior to him physically leaving the United States, his personnel file was current and complete.  Between the end of the FY12 GOAAB and during his deployment, somehow dates and codes were unilaterally changed in his personnel file that resulted in the FY13 and FY14 GOAAB deeming him ineligible when, in fact, he was fully eligible to be considered by these boards, as well.  Consequently, he was not properly and timely notified in order to submit his "Statement of Intent" to be considered for an assignment by the FY13 and FY14 GOAAB and compete for an assignment by the FY13 and FY14 GOPSB. 

	b.  On 24 April 2014, he contacted the GOAAB board team regarding his eligibility for the FY15 GOAAB/GOPSB.  A staff member represented to him that his birthday on file was in February (actual date is 15 July 1956).  When she made that correction, he was told he would receive an "Eligible" notification from Captain (CPT) Va---ie G---y, Operations Officer, General Officer Management Office (GOMO), Office of the Chief of Army Reserve (OCAR), along with a "Statement of Intent" to complete and return to the GOAAB board team no later than 9 May 2014.  On 7 May 2014, he contacted the GOAAB board team again to let them know he had not received his "Eligible" notification and wanted to submit his written desire to be considered for an assignment by the FY15 GOAAB.  Another staff member informed him that he did not meet the age requirement by seven (7) months.  In addition, he informed him that he was not properly and timely notified by the GOAAB for FY13 and FY14 because he did not complete the Army War College (which the board had on file since 2011).

	c.  On 7 May 2014, he contacted Ms. Re---ca Y---g, Retirement Point Program Manager, Soldier Programs Services Division, who went into his personnel records to respond to his inquiry as to why his Retirement Eligibility Year date disappeared in 2012 and his retirement points stopped posting.  Being extremely helpful, she could see that someone unilaterally made changes to his records that caused him to be sent to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) while on active duty in Afghanistan.  When this IRR orders were revoked, his records were mis-coded (to include reflecting the wrong information about completing his Senior Service College).  Where he was stationed in Afghanistan, connectivity and access to AKO was very difficult.  He did not receive any proper and timely notification about any of these material mistakes in his personnel file and how it adversely effected his otherwise eligibility to be considered for both the FY13 and FY14 GOAAB/GOPSB.  

	d.  In order to preserve his options, on 8 May 2014, he submitted his written "Statement of Intent" to the FY15 USAR GOAAB/GOPSB.  He is simply asking for fairness.  During these 25 years in the USAR, he has complied with all the criteria to make him eligible to submit an application for consideration for the last several boards, only to be unfairly and mistakenly internally categorized as ineligible without any notification or personal knowledge.  He requests assistance to correct this in the process to allow him to be considered in the FY15 GOAAB/GOPSB, since this will probably be his last opportunity before reaching age 60.  

3.  The applicant provides:

* 2015 GOAAB Statement of Intent
* Email from HRC
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's records show he was born on 15 July 1956.  He would turn 60 years of age on 15 July 2016.

2.  He was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer of the Army and executed an oath of office on 30 May 1989.  He completed the Judge Advocate General Advanced Course from August 1993 to May 1994. 

3.  On 2 July 2009, HRC issued him a Notification of Eligibility for Retired Pay at Age 60 (20-Year Letter).

4.  He served in a variety of assignments and he completed the U.S. Army War College from 1 May 2010 to 22 July 2011.  He was advanced to colonel (COL) on 13 January 2010. 

5.  On 17 August 2012, HRC mailed him a Military Service Obligation (MSO) letter in accordance with DOD Directive 1235.13 (Administration and Management of the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) and the Inactive National Guard (ING)).  He did not respond. 

6.  He entered active duty on 18 August 2012 and served in Afghanistan from 26 August 2012 to 7 September 2013. 

7.  On 2 October 2012, after having failed to respond to his MSO letter, HRC mailed him a second notification.  

8.  On 19 November 2012, after having failed to respond to the second notification, he was reassigned to the IRR.

9.  On 6 February 2013, he submitted his MSO letter to HRC.  He indicated that he desired to remain in the IRR. 

10.  He was honorably released from active duty on 19 October 2013.

11.  On 9 May 2014, he submitted a Statement of Intent, indicating he desired to compete for an assignment by the 2015 GOPSB.  

12.  On 9 May 2014, by email, a staff officer at GOMO advised the applicant that he did not meet the age criteria which required an eligible officer not to have a date of birth after 28 February 1957.  Only the Secretary of the Army can change the criteria for the GOAAB/GOPSB. 

13.  Military Personnel Message Number 14-112, dated 23 April 2014, Subject: 2015 USAR GOAAB and GOPSB announced the eligibility criteria for the 2015 USAR GOAAB/GOPSB convening on 27 October 2014.  It states, in addition to being having completed the Army War College or an equivalent resident senior service college, all eligible COLs must meet the age criteria of not attaining 59 years of age prior to 1 March 2016.  Due to the unique nature of Army Reserve General Officer duties and assignments, this is a voluntary board; no relook board will be conducted. 

14.  DOD Directive 1235.13 explains in Enclosure 3 (Procedures), placement in the IRR or ING.  Reserve Component (RC) members not assigned to the Selected Reserve (Selected Reserve units, Individual Mobilization Augmentees positions, or on Active Guard Reserve duty), the Standby Reserve, the Retired Reserve, or on extended AD, will be placed in the IRR or the ING.  This includes members separating from active duty with a remaining MSO, as defined in section 651 Reference (e) and DODI 1304.25 (Reference (k)), or other commitment to serve in the Ready Reserve and not placed in the Selected Reserve.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was born on 15 July 1956.  The FY15 USAR GOAAB/GOPSB criteria required an eligible COL to not attain 59 years of age prior to 1 March 2016.  In order to meet the age requirements, an eligible officer's date of birth must be after 28 February 1957.  The applicant did not meet the age criteria in the MILPER Message. 

2.  Due to the unique nature of Army Reserve General Officer duties and assignments, this is a voluntary board; no relook board will be conducted.  The applicant 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)                                         AR20140009522





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140009522



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003223

    Original file (20150003223.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    But even if his records were coded educationally qualified for civilian education, with documents, there is no guarantee that he would have been selected for promotion. But even if his records were coded educationally qualified for civilian education, with documents, there is no guarantee that he would have been selected for promotion. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. submitting his record to a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001572

    Original file (20150001572.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a review of the eligibility criteria for promotion to SGM, it appears those who completed the SMC prior to RCP and eligibility criteria changes were not addressed in Military Personnel (MILPER) Message Number 13-037 (FY13 USAR AGR SGM Training and Selection Board Announcement Message) for the FY13 USAR AGR SGM Selection and Training Board. d. In her view, the promotion board consideration file was not properly constituted based on the omission of appropriate eligibility criteria...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011964

    Original file (20140011964.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides: * an extract of the FY15 LTC Chaplains Selection Board Results showing he was selected for promotion * DA Form 67-9 (OER) for the period 13 October 2012 through 31 March 2014 * HRC memorandum, subject: Evaluation Report Appeal, dated 21 December 2012, with his appeal documentation * HRC memorandum, subject: PRB Results, dated 28 February 2013, with supporting documentation * Army Review Boards Agency memorandum, subject: OER Appeal, dated 16 September 2013 * HRC...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150010445

    Original file (20150010445.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Under this program, a DA Form 4187 was not a requirement indicated in the message; rather, it stated the AIP was effective on the date of arrival to the assignment. c. A DA Form 4187, dated 14 April 2015, wherein he requested CSP incentive pay effective 14 February 2014. The three categories of assignments eligible for this program are: * Soldiers who volunteer for a 36-month initial assignment to Pyeongtaek, Osan, Daegu, Chinhae, or Seoul; agreements for this category become effective on...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009894

    Original file (20130009894.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states he believes he is entitled to and should receive promotion to the rank of BG. (2) Each colonel who is recommended on a GOAAB order of merit list for assignment to a position of the next higher grade will be considered by a GOPSB. 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016040

    Original file (20140016040.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides: * a 12-page list titled "2012 CPT AMEDD (Army Medical Department) Promotion Selection Board Results by Competitive Category" * her CPT promotion order * two copies of her 1LT promotion order CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. If she had not been in the USAR, she would have attended the active duty BOLC prior to starting USAGPAN when she entered active duty on 25 May 2012, and therefore would have been board eligible for the FY13 CPT AMEDD ADL PSB. Enclosure 3, 4(c)...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012031

    Original file (20090012031.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He also requests this SSB review his promotion file as it was prepared by the Office of the Chief, Army Reserve (OCAR), General Officer Management Office (GOMO) for presentation to the 2005 General Officer Assignment Advisory Board (GOAAB), the most recent board that did not consider him due to his pending physical evaluation board (PEB) appeal. The applicant states that he was notified by the 12 September 2003 non-duty related PEB that he was medically unfit to perform his duties as a U.S....

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020493

    Original file (20130020493.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 December 2012, the Secretary of the Army directed removal of the applicant from the FY11, RC, CPT, AR Non-AGR, APL, Competitive Category, Promotion Selection List under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code 14310, Executive Order 13358, Secretary of Defense delegation to the Secretary of the Army dated 20 March 2006 and Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers), paragraph 3-18. (1) These boards are convened to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120009171

    Original file (20120009171.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was transferred to the USAR Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) effective 2 March 1993 to complete his 8-year obligation and should therefore have been separated from the IRR effective 14 May 1996. In a memorandum, dated 24 April 2012, the Iowa ARNG stated its full support of the applicant's request for correction of his separation from the IRR. There is no evidence of record and he provided none to show he resigned or requested to be separated from the IRR upon the completion of his MSO or...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008758

    Original file (20140008758.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ILE constructive credit was never a requirement for him to be educationally qualified. 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. Officers not educationally qualified will not be selected for promotion.