MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            6 July 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000038846

	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	
	Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest M. Willcher		Member	
	Mr. John P. Infante		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:  That an Officer Evaluation Report (OER) he was given as a second lieutenant be removed from his performance fiche so that he can be reconsidered for promotion to major.

APPLICANT STATES:  The Chief of Staff (CoS) of the Army directed that when officers are promoted to captain, all of their 2nd lieutenant OER’s will be transferred to the restricted fiche.  He believes that since one of his 2nd lieutenant OER’s was not removed from his performance fiche, he should be given promotion reconsideration.

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

On 27 October 1999 the applicant, a captain serving on active duty, submitted a request for promotion reconsideration based on the fact that an OER he was given as a 2LT was considered by the promotion board in contravention to the CoS’s instructions.  On 18 February 2000 the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) denied the applicant’s request.  In its denial the PERSCOM stated that while the promotion board did in fact review one of the applicant’s 2LT OER’s in contravention with Army policy, that OER was not negative and, therefore, did not make a difference in whether he was selected for promotion.  The PERSCOM explained that promotion reconsideration is only authorized when a material error is made in a promotion board’s consideration of an officer.  A material error is defined as something that, in the judgement of the reviewing officials, reasonably may have resulted in the officer being selected for promotion.

The OER in question was a report for the period covering June 1989 through May 1990.  In that report it is stated that the applicant “is an extremely dedicated and responsible young officer” and the applicant “has done a great job training his platoon.  During this year [the applicant] has displayed sound judgement and motivated the members of his platoon” and the applicant “has great potential.”  The applicant’s senior rater said the applicant “is an energetic young officer who is learning his job well.  He is well motivated and demonstrated sound judgment.  His care and concern for his platoon is noteworthy.  [The applicant] displays the professional “can do” attitude that will allow him to be an excellent platoon leader.”

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

1.  In this instance the Board must agree with the PERSCOM.  The applicant has not demonstrated that the OER that was erroneously reviewed by the promotion board resulted in his failure to be selected for promotion.

2.  The OER in question was a positive report.  If it had been negative or contained negative remarks, the Board would have granted the applicant’s request for promotion reconsideration.

3.  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

___cmf __  ___emw_  ___jpi___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000038846	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2000038846	
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.	131.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.