MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            24 July 2001                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001054867

	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 N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		Member	
	Mr. William D. Powers		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:  Promotion to lieutenant colonel (LTC) and return to active Reserve status.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he should have been selected for LTC and continued to served based on a small number of officers in his Senior Rater (SR) profiles reflecting an inaccurate potential with center of mass reports on his officer evaluation reports (OER’s).  He further states that reviews of his rater and SR comments by promotion boards were not accurately assessed.

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

He was appointed in the Reserve as a second lieutenant effective 22 February 1979 and entered on active duty.

He attained the grade of captain effective 1 February 1983.

He was released from active duty for failure of selection for permanent promotion effective 1 July 1990.  He was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).

He was considered and selected for promotion to major by the 1991 Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB).  He was promoted to major effective 25 February 1991.

He was considered and not selected for promotion to LTC by the 1997 and 1998 RCSB’s. The board did not divulge the reason(s) except that it was not for lack of military education.

His records did not contain material error when considered by the 1997 and 1998 selection boards.

He was honorably separated on 4 October 1999.

Current Reserve promotion policy specifies that promotion reconsideration by a special selection (SSB) board may only be based on erroneous non-consideration 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 non-selection 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 policy further provides that boards are not required to divulge the proceedings or the reason(s) for non-selection, except where an individual is not qualified due to non-completion of required military schooling.

This policy also specifics that individuals twice not selected for promotion to major will be transferred to the Retired Reserve if they are 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, PERSCOM, expressed the opinion that the applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to LTC by the 1997 and 1998 RCSB’s.  His files contained all of his pertinent documents when viewed by the boards.  The specific reason he was not selected is unknown.  Selection boards are prohibited by law to record or divulge their reason for selection or non-selection.  The applicant did however have 6 years inactivity making him less competitive with his peers and the last six OER’s were center of mass (average).  OER’s are the primary tools used by selection board in making their determination of promotion.  The applicant’s concerns questioning inconsistencies in the SR profiles can be addressed to the United States Army Reserve Personnel Command, Evaluations Office for appeal action if warranted under Army Regulation 623-105.  Based on his file being complete, it was recommended his application be denied.

The opinion was forwarded to the applicant for his acknowledgment/rebuttal on 14 May 2001.  He did not 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.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to promotion reconsideration to LTC by an SSB.  He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.

2.  The Board has noted his contention that the promotion selection boards did not properly review his rater and SR comments on promotion; however, it is not supported by his application.  His records were completed and without material error and included all pertinent documents when reviewed by the 1997 and 1998 promotion selection boards.

3.  The Board further notes that as shown in this case, promotion is not automatic based on qualifications alone, but includes a competitive process of 

an RCSB determining an individual's potential and ability to perform at the higher grade.  Promotion and retention is keenly competitive, and many officers will not be selected.

4.  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.

5.  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.

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

_mvt____  __wdp__  _jns____     DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001054867	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010724	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.