MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            9 November 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000040351

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson	
	Mr. Orville W. Troesch, Jr.		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		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 to the rank and pay grade of Lieutenant Colonel/0-5 (LTC).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was told by personnel officials that the LTC promotion board assessed him as an Air Defense Artillery (ADA) officer, when he was in fact a chemical officer.  He was told that his chances of selection on the second board were the same as the first and branch had no bearing.  However, he claims that numbers and percentages clearly prove otherwise.  He was told that his entire file was assessed and his non-selection was due to his Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs).  He indicates that his entire file was not assessed and the promotion board only reviewed his senior rater profiles and branch.  He claims that both promotion boards that reviewed his records selected less qualified officers because they were Combat Service Support officers or had razor thin different senior rater profiles.  He requests that his entire file, which he meticulously put together, be reviewed.  This file includes his recent civilian and military education, his OER ratings, his branch qualifications and transfer, his maximum physical fitness test scores, his duty assignments, and his recent photo, which he contends proves his case.  He indicates that he earned the honor to assume increased responsibility and to serve as a LTC in the USAR.

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

He was commissioned a 2nd Lieutenant (2LT) in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 22 August 1980.  He attained the rank and pay grade of Major/0-4 on 21 August 1992 and he is currently assigned to the 87th Division, Birmingham, Alabama, a USAR Troop Program Unit (TPU).

The applicant was considered for promotion to LTC by the 1998 Department of the Army (DA) Reserve Component (RC) promotion selection board and he was not selected or recommended for promotion. 

On 9 May 2000, the results of the 1999 RC LTC promotion selection board were released and the applicant’s name was included on the list of those officers selected and recommended for promotion.

In connection with the processing of this case an advisory opinion was requested of and provided by the Chief of the RC Promotions Branch, Army Reserve Personnel Command (ARPERSCOM).  The RC Promotion Branch Chief included with his opinion a copy of a response to a Congressional inquiry pertaining to the applicant and an earlier memorandum provided by them to this Board.  This opinion also pointed out the fact that the applicant was in fact selected for promotion by the 1999 DA RC LTC promotion selection board and that he was advised of this information.  

In the documents provided by ARPERSCOM they indicated that the applicant was considered for promotion to LTC by the 1998 RC promotion board and that he was not selected for promotion by this properly constituted DA selection board.  In addition, they commented that there was no evidence that a materiel error existed in the applicant’s file when it was reviewed by the 1998 promotion board. Further, they indicated that as a matter of policy, promotion selection boards do not release or provide specifics reasons for a member’s non-selection. The results of promotion boards are based on the best collective judgement of the promotion board members who make their selection of the best qualified officers based a review of records using the whole person concept.  

ARPERSCOM promotion officials also stated that in order to qualify for reconsideration by a special selection board a member must demonstrate that there was some material error in his or her record at the time it was reviewed by the selection board.  Finally, they opine that lacking evidence that there was some critical element missing from the applicant’s record, there is no basis for promotion reconsideration in his case and they recommended that the application be denied in this case.  

On 22 June 2000, the applicant was provided a copy of the ARPERSCOM advisory opinion and given the opportunity to rebut its contents.  To date he has failed to respond. 

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.  A review of the evidence of record reveals that the applicant was considered, but not selected for promotion to LTC by a properly constituted DA promotion selection board in 1998.  However, he was selected for promotion to LTC by the 1999 LTC RC promotion selection board.  

2.  The Board finds no evidence or argument advanced by the applicant that would suggest that his non-selection for promotion in 1998 was the result of flawed judgement on the part of the promotion board members.  

3.  Further, notwithstanding his contentions to the contrary, there is no evidence to show that a materiel error existed in the applicant’s record when it was reviewed by the 1998 promotion selection board, which is supported by the fact that he was selected for promotion by the 1999 RC LTC selection board.  Thus, the Board concludes that the requested relief is not warranted in this case. 

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 this 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

___jlp ___  ___owt__  __bje____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000040351	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/11/09	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	N/A	
DISCHARGE REASON	N/A	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  310	131.1000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.