PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:  8 March 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2000043341

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings 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. Roger Able		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Lutz		Member	
	Mr. William D. Powers		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests promotion consideration to chief warrant officer three (CW3).

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was eligible for promotion to CW3 in May 1998 when he was assigned to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR).  At the time he had 6 years time in grade and met all the requirements for promotion. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was appointed in the Reserve with prior service as a captain effective 28 March 1989.

5.  He was reappointed in the Tennessee Army National Guard (TNARNG) from the USAR as a CW2 effective 8 March 1992.

6.  He was transferred from the TNARNG to the IRR effective 1 January 1998.

7.  Based on the 6 years time in grade requirement his maximum years of service in grade (MYIG) date for CW3 was 7 March 1998.

8.  He was erroneously not considered for promotion to CW3 by the 1998 and 1999 Reserve Components Selection Boards (RCSB’s).

9.  He transferred from the USAR to the TNARNG effective 17 May 2000.

10.  Army Regulation 135-155 prescribes the policies and procedures for promotion of Reserve Officers.  This regulation specifies that promotion reconsideration by a special selection board (SSB) may only be based on erroneous non-consideration or material error that existed in the record at the time of consideration.

11.  The regulation also specifies that warrant officers in an active Reserve status may be selected for promotion provided they meet the minimum promotion service and military education requirements.

12.  The regulation does not provide for promotion consideration of ARNG warrant officers.

13.  The Chief, Promotion and Notifications Branch, Office of Promotions, PERSCOM, expressed the opinion that based on the applicant meeting the time in grade requirement in 1998, information received indicated he was not eligible for an earlier board due to the fact the officer was in the National Guard as of 8 March 1992.  The applicant states he left the National Guard in January 1998.  The earliest board he was eligible for would be in 1998.  Applicant could be 

eligible for an SSB due to omission under 1998, 1999 and 2000 criteria; however, if selected cannot be promoted due to applicant is again in the National Guard as of May 2000.  It was recommended that the applicant’s request be denied.

14.  The opinion was forwarded to the applicant for rebuttal on 4 December 2000. In his rebuttal dated 12 December 2000, he states that he was a member of the IRR from January 1998 to May 2000 and believes he should be considered for promotion to CW3.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant is entitled to promotion consideration to CW3 under 1998 and 1999 criteria and his records should now be submitted to duly constituted SSB’s for that purpose.

2.  The applicant was erroneously not considered for promotion to CW3 by selection boards in 1998 and 1999.  The 1998 and 1999 RCSB’s should have considered him, so that he could have been promoted on or before his MYIG date and/or before his 17 May 2000 transfer from the USAR.

3.  The Board concludes that the applicant was not given fair and timely promotion consideration in 1998 and 1999.  The applicant should not be penalized for what appears to have been an error on the part of those responsible to timely consider him for promotion.  

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by submitting the records of the individual concerned to duly constituted SSB’s for promotion consideration.

2.  That, if selected, his records be further corrected by showing he was promoted to the next higher grade on his date of eligibility therefor, as determined by appropriate Departmental officials using the criteria cited, provided he was otherwise qualified and met all other prerequisites for promotion.

3.  That, if not selected, the applicant be so notified.

4.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__ra____  ___bl__  ___wp__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		___Roger Able______
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000043341	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010308	
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.