MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            24 August 2000    
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000035911

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that he be reconsidered for promotion to the grade of captain.

APPLICANT STATES:  The only reason he was not selected for captain by the 1997 and 1998 promotion selection boards was because he did not have a 
“4-year college degree.”  He notes that he obtained the degree in November 1999 and is “now fully qualified for promotion to captain.”  In support of his request he submits copies of his degree as well as letters from members of his chain of command recommending reconsideration and noting that he is an asset to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR).

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted in the Army National Guard in 1987 and was discharged for the purpose of accepting a commission on 15 June 1990.  He was appointed as an Army National Guard second lieutenant on 16 June 1990 and promoted to first lieutenant on 15 June 1993.

The applicant’s performance evaluation reports consistently indicated that he “met requirements” and should be “promoted with contemporaries.”  His senior raters often rated him below center of mass and in July 1994 he “failed to show for AFPT [Army Fitness Performance Test] testing and all make-up tests and did not provide a profile sheet, or any medical documentation for excusal.”

On 1 October 1995 the applicant was discharged from the Army National Guard and assigned to the United States Army Reserve Control Group.  He returned to a troop program unit in September 1998.

On 4 May 1999 the applicant was informed that he had been twice nonselected for promotion to the grade of captain and as such would be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 140-10.  He was honorably discharged from the USAR on 4 January 2000.

The University of Phoenix conferred his Bachelor of Science in Business degree in November 1999.

Army Regulation 135-155 states that promotion selection boards will base their recommendations for promotion on impartial consideration of all personnel being considered.  It notes that selection board action is administratively final and that standby boards will be convened to prevent any injustice to an officer or former officers who were eligible for promotion but whose records through error, were not submitted to a promotion selection board for consideration or contained a material error when reviewed by the selection board.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  In order for the applicant to be reconsidered for promotion by a standby board he must show that either his records were not submitted to the promotion selection board for consideration or that his records contained a material error when reviewed by the selection board.  There is no evidence, and the applicant has not submitted any, that such was the case.

2.  While the applicant maintains that the only reason he was not selected for promotion was because of his lack of a four-year degree, clearly his performance evaluation reports, which indicate that he was a satisfactory performer at best, contributed to his nonselection.

3.  The fact that the applicant secured a degree after the board convened is not now a basis for reconsideration and is not evidence that his records were in error at the time the promotion selection boards convened.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___gdp__  ___clg__  ___alr__  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000035911	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000824	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Deny	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	112.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.