MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  29 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20000389539

	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. Stephanie Thompkins		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John D. Miller		Chairperson	
	Mr. Charles Gainer		Member	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		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, promotion reconsideration to chief warrant officer four (CW4) by a special selection board (SSB).

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was never contacted in 1999 that his name was being submitted to the promotion board after his non-selection in 1998.  He was non-selected because had not yet completed the required military education.  He further states that had he been contacted, he would have requested the board president not to consider him until he was able to complete his military education requirement.  He submits a copy of his course completion form and certificate in support of his request. 

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

He was appointed in the Reserve as a warrant officer one effective 16 February 1984.

He was promoted to CW2 effective 17 February 1987 and CW3 effective 16 February 1993.  Based on the required 6 years time in grade, his maximum time in grade (MTIG) date for promotion to CW4 was 16 February 1999.

He was considered and not selected for promotion to CW4 by the 1998 and 1999 Reserve Components Selection Boards (RCSB’s).  He was not qualified for promotion based on the lack of the required military education.

He completed the military education requirement of the Warrant Officer Advanced Course (WOAC) on 2 February 2000, after the convening dates of the RCSB’s.

Army Regulation 135-155 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 nonconsideration or material error which existed in the records at the time of consideration.  Material error in this context is one or more errors of such a nature that, in the judgment of the reviewing official (or body), it caused an individual’s nonselection by a promotion board and, that had such error(s) been corrected at the time the individual was considered, a reasonable chance would have resulted that the individual would have been recommended for promotion.

The regulation also specifies that individuals will receive mandatory promotion consideration prior to their MTIG so that, if selected, they may be promoted on their future MTIG.

Army Regulation 135-155 also states completion of the WOAC is required for promotion to CW4.

The regulation further specifies that individuals twice not selected for promotion to CW4 will be removed from active status within 90 days after the selection board submits its results to Department of the Army Headquarters.  The individual will be transferred to the Retired Reserve if he/she is eligible and request such transfer, or retained in the active Reserve when more than 18 but less than 20 qualifying years of service have been completed, or discharged.

The Chief, Promotion and Notifications Branch, Office of Promotions, Total Army Personnel Command, expressed the opinion that the applicant was considered by the 1998 and 1999 RCSB’s and not recommended because he did not meet the education requirements, and that there were officer evaluation reports missing from his files.  The applicant states he was not notified as to his name being submitted to the 1999 promotion board.  In accordance with regulations, the Secretary of the Army designates the zone of consideration for promotion approximately 180 days prior to the convening date of the board.  The applicant was in the zone of consideration and in an active Reserve status, and he would not have any authority to be removed from the board due to noncompletion of military education.

Information received reflects the applicant completed the WOAC on 2 February 2000.  Since he was promoted to CW3 effective 16 February 1993, he was eligible to enroll in an advanced course the day after he completed his officer basic course.  Over 5 years have elapsed and he had not completed the course.  Based on these facts, it is recommended that the applicant’s request be disapproved.

The opinion was forwarded to the applicant for his acknowledgment/rebuttal on 15 May 2000.  In his rebuttal dated 14 June 2000, the applicant states that he was not aware of promotion requirements of “designating the zone for consideration for promotion approximately 180 days”, and he was not cognizant that his military education was not up to the promotion requirements until he was able to secure the Army regulations.  He further states he was told that Reservists are not allowed to attend the required Residence Course or that there was not funding available to send him.

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

1.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to promotion reconsideration to CW4 by an SSB.  He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.

2.  His contention that he was not aware that he would be considered again by the 1999 promotion board and of the education requirements for promotion have been noted; however, the applicant should have been aware that he needed to complete the WOAC for promotion to CW4.  

3.  The Board further notes that the applicant was correctly identified and considered by the 1995 RCSB in accordance with pertinent regulations.  While the Board does not dispute his contention that he did not know the WOAC was required prior to his second nonselection, it also notes that the applicant knew or should have known that he had since 16 February 1993, the day after his promotion to CW3, to enroll in an advanced course.

4.  No individual in the rank of CW3 was eligible or entitled to promotion to CW4 without completion of the WOAC prior to promotion consideration.

5.  When his files were reviewed, it was discovered several OER’s were missing from his promotion file and this would normally be a basis for promotion reconsideration by an SSB.  However, since the applicant would be found educationally not qualified, he is not entitled to SSB consideration.

6.  Implicit in the Army’s promotion system is the universally accepted and frequently discussed principle that officers have a responsibility for their own careers.  The general requirements and working of the system are widely known and specific details such as RCSB dates and promotion zones are widely published in official, quasi-official and unofficial publications, and in official communications.  The applicant needed to insure, well in advance, that his record would present his career and qualifications to that board in the best possible light.  He knew or should have known of the long-standing regulatory requirements for promotion to CW4 and it appears he failed to complete the WOAC within the time required through his own volition.

7.  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 this requirement.

8.  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

__jm___  ___cg___  __ra_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	A2000038539	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000829	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.