PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            10 October 2001 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001062136

	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. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. Charles Gainor		Member	
	Mr. Joe R. Schroeder		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 clarification or deletion of the document dated 28 March 1990 finding him “non-selectable” for promotion to first lieutenant (1LT). He states that this document finds him “non-selectable” as an infantry (IN) officer. He was recently interested in re-entry on active duty (AD) but the reviewing board found this document and thought it meant he was non-promotable as a Army Nurse Corps (ANC) officer.  He also states that he was an IN officer (Reserve) prior to his commission as an ANC officer, AD.

3.  The applicant’s request, dated 12 March 1993, was received and retained by the Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Total Army Personnel Command, for authority to conduct special selection boards (SSB’s) for promotion reconsideration to captain.

4.  The applicant’s available military records show that he was commissioned in the Regular Army, IN, as a second lieutenant (2LT) effective 19 June 1987.

5.  On 30 June 1988 a Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (FLAG) was initiated against him for Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) failure.

6.  On 1 April 1989, the Brigadier General, Medical Corps, Madigan Army Medical Center advised the applicant’s command that it’s recommendation against promotion was approved and the six-month retention period was disapproved.  

7.  He was separated from AD effective 29 June 1989 and transferred to the USAR (Reinforcement).

8.  He was promoted to 1LT, USAR effective 30 June 1989.

9.  Based upon review of the applicant’s records by PERSCOM, it was determined the applicant was erroneously not considered and is eligible for consideration for promotion to captain by SSB’s under 1992, 1993 and 1994 criteria.

10.  The appropriate SSB’s for promotion consideration to the grade of captain, USAR, under the 1992 and 1993 criteria have previously reviewed the applicant’s records and he was not recommended.  He has been notified of these results.

11.  The applicant was recommended for promotion to the next higher grade under 1994 criteria by a special selection board adjourning on 19 April 2001.

12.  The document referenced by the applicant, dated 28 March 1990 has not been provided by the applicant, and is not contained in his available records.

13.  In view of the foregoing, had the applicant who was separated because of non-selection been selected for promotion to captain by the original selection board, the applicant would have been retained in an active Reserve status, and/or would not have been discharged or transferred to the Retired Reserve, whichever is applicable.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In light of the fact that the applicant has now been recommended for promotion to the grade of captain under 1994 criteria, had the applicant been considered by the original selection board, it is reasonable to conclude that he would have been recommended for promotion at that time.

2.  Based on the foregoing conclusion, it is also reasonable to presume that, had the applicant been recommended for promotion by the original selection board, he would have been promoted in the USAR at the time of his eligibility therefor as prescribed in the appropriate regulations.

3.  The Board also concludes that had the respective promotion board considered the individual, he would have been selected and retained in his active Reserve status.

4.  The Board notes the applicant cannot receive clarification or deletion of the document dated 28 March 1990 finding him ‘non-selectable” for promotion to 1LT, since the document he refers to was not provided and is otherwise not available.

5.  In view of the facts and circumstances surrounding this matter, the interest of justice would best be served by now correcting the applicant’s records to show that the applicant was recommended and was promoted to the next higher grade on the date of eligibility therefor, as determined by appropriate Departmental officials using the criteria cited; and that if separated, the Department's records should be further corrected to show retention in an active Reserve status.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected to show that he was promoted in the USAR to captain on his promotion eligibility date, as determined by appropriate Departmental officials using the criteria cited, provided he was otherwise qualified and met all other prerequisites for promotion.

2.  That if separated, the records be further corrected to show:
	a.  that the discharge or transfer to the Retired Reserve, as applicable, is void, and of no force or effect;

	b.  that the individual was credited with qualifying service for Reserve retirement for respective retirement years, from the date of the now-voided discharge or transfer to the Retired Reserve to the date of return to the active Reserve;

	c.  that an adequate explanation be placed in the individual’s official personnel file to show that the gap in officer evaluation reports, from the date of the now-voided discharge or transfer to the Retired Reserve to the date of return to active Reserve status, was not caused by any fault on the individual’s part, and to insure that the individual is not prejudiced thereby in the consideration of any future personnel actions; and

	d.  that all documents related to the now-voided discharge or transfer be expunged from the individual’s official military records.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

_jrs____  _cg_____  __lls___       GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		        Luther L. Santiful
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001062136	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20011010	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.