MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            7 February 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001062440

	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:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. Lester Echols		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, that he be granted promotion reconsideration to the pay grade of E-7 by a Department of the Army Standby Promotion Advisory Board (STAB).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was advised that he did not need to attend the Basic Noncommissioned Officer Course (BNCOC) because of his date of rank and after being non-selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-7 for 6 years, he was informed that he was no longer eligible for consideration because he had not completed BNCOC.  He goes on to state that he had originally been scheduled to attend the BNCOC; however, the course was cancelled due to lack of funding and he never attended.  He also states that he believes that he has been unjustly denied promotion all of these years because he was not allowed to attend the course and that had he known he needed the course, he would have attended.

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

He initially enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) under the Delayed Entry Program (DEP) in May 1978.  He enlisted in the Regular Army in June 1978 and served for 3 years before he was honorably released from active duty and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Ready) in 1981.

On 20 August 1988, he was transferred to the Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) Control Group and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 1 December 1992.

On 16 July 1993, orders were published which directed the applicant to attend the BNCOC at Fort Lee, Virginia, effective 19 May 1994, in a temporary duty (TDY) status.  The orders were revoked on 12 May 1994.  There is no indication in the available records to show why the orders were revoked.

On 2 October 1997, a memorandum was dispatched to all noncommissioned officers (NCO) in the AGR Program who were in the zone of consideration (including the applicant) to the pay grade of E-7.  The memorandum advised the individuals concerned that completion of the Advanced NCO Course (ANCOC) would be necessary for an NCO to retain a promotion to the pay grade of E-7.  It also explained that soldiers would not be considered for promotion if they were within 12 months of reaching their Retention Control Point (RCP) or Mandatory Removal Date (MRD), as of the convening date of the Board.  Individuals were advised to contact their Personnel Management Officer (PMO) at the Full-Time Support Management Division at the Army Reserve Personnel Command (ARPERSCOM) in St. Louis, Missouri.

On 8 October 1998, the ARPERSCOM again dispatched a memorandum to all individuals in the zone of consideration for promotion to the pay grade of E-7 in the AGR Program.  That memorandum advised eligible individuals that individuals with a DOR of 1 October 1993 were required to have completed BNCOC to be eligible for consideration and must complete the ANCOC to retain the promotion.

On 15 May 1999, the applicant submitted a request for promotion reconsideration contending that he was one of the best qualified staff sergeants in his military occupational specialty (MOS).  There is no evidence in the available records of the request being processed through the chain of command or if it was ever received or acted upon by officials at the ARPERSCOM.

The applicant requested and was granted approval to take 2 days of permissive TDY to go to the ARPERSCOM from 1 December to 2 December 1999, to review his records for the upcoming promotion board. 

On 4 October 2000, the ARPERSCOM again dispatched a memorandum to each eligible NCO in the zone of consideration for promotion to the pay grade of E-7.   It provided, in pertinent part, that eligible individuals must have completed the BNCOC if their DOR was 1 October 1992 or later and that completion of ANCOC was required to retain the promotion.  They were also advised to contact their PMO.

On 10 May 2001, the applicant dispatched a request for promotion reconsideration to the ARPERSCOM requesting that he be reconsidered for promotion because he had been incorrectly advised that he did not need BNCOC completion to be eligible for consideration and that he had unjustly not been considered.  There is no indication that he processed his request through his chain of command or that it was ever acted upon or received at the ARPERSCOM.

In an electronic mail (E-mail) message from the ARPERSCOM Reenlistment office on 14 May 2001, the applicant was informed, based on his e-mail inquiry to that office, that he was ineligible to reenlist; however, he could extend to meet his RCP of 20 years of active Federal service.  It also indicated that he should contact the promotions branch to determine why he was not considered for promotion.

In a 3 August 2001, e-mail message from the sergeant major (SGM) of the FTSMD to the applicant, the SGM informed the applicant, in effect, that he was a victim of changes in the promotion system and had fallen through the cracks because he had not been rescheduled for training and had not made it known sooner.  He also opined that because the applicant would reach his RCP in October 2002, he would not be eligible for promotion consideration.  He advised the applicant to apply to the Board for relief.

A review of the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) shows that the only Noncommissioned Officer Education System Course (NCOES) the applicant has attended was the Primary Leadership Course (PLC) in 1982.  He has an excellent record of performance and no record of any derogatory information contained in his OMPF. 

Army Regulation 140-158 provides the policies and procedures for the conduct of an AGR STAB.  It provides, in pertinent part, that an individual may request reconsideration for promotion within 1 year of notification of the board results if they believe that their records contained an error or omission.  All requests must be processed through the chain of command.

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.  Although the applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that he properly applied for promotion reconsideration through his chain of command and that he has exhausted his administrative remedies, the Board finds that given his mandatory release date in October 2002, it would be in the interest of justice to address his issues at this time, rather than delay it any further.

2.  While the Board concedes that the Department may bear some of the burden in this matter, it appears that the applicant bears the majority of the burden because he did not pursue further educational opportunities after his BNCOC orders were revoked.  The Board recognizes that in many cases individuals do not have control over class cancellations, if such was the case, however, that does not relieve them of the responsibility to further pursue those educational opportunities necessary to remain competitive for promotion opportunities.  

3.  The evidence in this case suggests that the applicant made no attempts to pursue attendance at the BNCOC or the ANCOC or to determine why he was not being allowed to attend those courses until he had already been non-selected several times.  In waiting so late, he placed himself in a position to be ineligible for attendance at an NCOES course or consideration for promotion.

4.  The Board finds it unlikely that an NCO who has served on active duty as long as the applicant has, is not aware of the responsibility that NCOs have to attend NCOES courses in order to be competitive for promotion or to remain on active duty.

5.  While the applicant’s failure to attend the BNCOC may very well be the reason he was not selected for promotion, it is a well-known fact that promotion boards do not and cannot by law, reveal the reasons for selection or               non-selection.  The Board will not attempt to second guess those boards that had the advantage of reviewing all of the available files to determine who was best qualified for promotion, especially at this late date.

6.  Accordingly, the Board finds that the applicant has failed to show that he was unjustly denied promotion to the pay grade of E-7 through no fault of his own and finds no basis to grant him promotion reconsideration.

7.  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

___fe ___  ___mkp__  ___le ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001062440	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/02/07	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  320	131.1000/PASSOVER TO E7	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.