MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            5 December 2000 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000042911

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Ann M. Campbell		Chairperson	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub		Member	
	Mr. Jose A. Martinez		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 of lieutenant colonel (LTC) or promotion reconsideration to that rank.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was erroneously notified by a general officer in the form of a congratulatory letter that he had been selected for promotion to the rank of LTC, when in fact he had not.  He goes on to state that he informed the general officer that a mistake had been made and he never received a response to his letter.  He also states that he believes an error occurred in his not being selected for promotion and believes that he either should be promoted or at least receive promotion reconsideration to that rank.  In support of his application he submits a copy of the congratulatory letter he received from the general officer and a copy of his (the applicant’s) letter back to the general officer.

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

He was commissioned as a United States Army Reserve (USAR) second lieutenant on 22 December 1977 and entered active duty on 16 July 1978 for a period of 3 years.  He served until he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) on 20 February 1981 in the rank of first lieutenant.

He was again ordered to active duty on 5 January 1982 for a period of 3 years. He remained on active duty and was promoted to the rank of major on 1 February 1991.

On 11 May 1995 a major general signed a letter of congratulation addressed to the applicant congratulating him on his selection for promotion to the rank of LTC.  The applicant responded back to the general officer in writing on 18 May 1995 informing him, in effect, that a mistake had been made and that he was in fact not selected for promotion.  He further requested that steps be taken to prevent future occurrences with officers in similar circumstances and opined that such a letter would be in order if he was selected by the Fiscal Year 1995 LTC Selection Board.  There is no indication that he received a reply to his letter in the available records.

On 16 April 1996, the applicant submitted a request for Voluntary Early Retirement under the Temporary Early Retirement Authority Program to be effective 1 October 1996.  His request was approved and orders were published on 29 May 1996.

Accordingly, on 30 September 1996 he was honorably REFRAD and was transferred to the Retired List in the rank of major effective 1 October 1996.  He had served 17 years, 8 months and 27 days of total active service.

In the processing of this case officials at the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) were contacted to ascertain the applicant’s promotion status.  Officials at the PERSCOM indicate that the applicant was considered by the 1994 (below the zone), the 1995 and 1996 LTC Promotion Selection Boards.  He was not selected for promotion by any of the three boards that reviewed his records.

Army Regulation 600-8-29 provides the policies and procedures for promotion reconsideration of officers.  It provides, in pertinent part, that promotion reconsideration will be granted when an officer was not considered from in or above the promotion zone by a regularly scheduled board or when material error existed in the officer’s records when they were reviewed by the promotion 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 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.

2.  While the Board cannot determine why the congratulatory letter was sent to the applicant, it appears that it was an administrative error on the part of officials reviewing the promotion selection lists and that the applicant was fully aware that such was the case at the time, as evidenced by his letter to the general officer who authored the letter.

3.  While the Board understands his frustrations and discontent with receiving such a letter, such an error does not in itself constitute a basis for promotion or promotion reconsideration.

4.  It is also apparent to the Board that the applicant was aware that he had not been selected for promotion because he applied for early retirement a year later, in the rank of major.  Had he believed that he had not been properly considered for promotion to the rank of LTC, he could have requested promotion reconsideration while on active duty.  There is no indication in the available records to show that such was the case.

5.  While it is unfortunate that he was not selected for promotion, it would be inappropriate for this Board to attempt to second-guess, at this time, a duly constituted promotion selection board that had the advantage of comparing the applicant’s records to those of his peers, when it determined that he was not the best qualified to meet the needs of the Army at the time.  This is especially true since the applicant has provided no evidentiary basis to warrant reconsideration.

6.  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

__amc __  __jam ___  ___alr___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000042911	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2000/12/05	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  310	131.0000/prom recon	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.