MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           25 APRIL 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002067599

	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. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. George D. Paxson		Member	
	Mr. Charles Gainor		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:  Consideration for promotion to Colonel by a special selection board (SSB).  

APPLICANT STATES:  That his complete the record officer evaluation report (OER) was not included in his records when reviewed by the FY01 Colonel, Army Nurse Corps selection board which convened in July 2001.  He was not selected for promotion by that board, but was informed that he could request consideration by a re-look (SSB) board.  He did, but his request was denied.  This was unfair as he was not evaluated with his peers.  Upon identifying the error, personnel branch tried to get his record before the board; however, the board would not accept it even though the review process had not begun.   

He states that his OER was finalized in May 2001, submitted to the Personnel Division at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, but was not processed in time to be considered by the selection board.  By the time the error was discovered, the date for accepting the OER had passed; however, the review of records [by the selection board] had not begun.  Attempts were made to have the OER included in his records before the board, but those attempts were rejected.  Informed that he could request consideration by a re-look board, he did and was denied.  The Inspector General stated that no regulatory violation occurred.

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

The applicant is an Army Nurse Corps lieutenant colonel who was a Health Systems Analyst/Administrative Officer with the Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) when he received a complete the record OER for the period     6 June 2000 through 4 May 2001.  That report was completed and signed by the rating officials and by the applicant on 31 May 2001.  The report was received at the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) on 10 July 2001 and is a center of mass report.

In a 10 July 2001 message to a colonel at WRAMC the Assistant Chief of Staff for Personnel at the North Atlantic Regional Medical Command indicated that the above mentioned OER did not make it to PERSCOM because of an oversight on the part of the military personnel office (MILPO).  That officer stated that she was ready to hand carry it to the board room because the board had not started reviewing records, but the OER branch would not allow her to do so.  Other messages included with the applicant’s request also indicate that the OER was not timely processed.    
 
On 15 October 2001 the applicant requested consideration by a special selection board based on the omission of the complete the record OER.  On 29 November 2001 PERSCOM denied his request, stating that promotion reconsideration was authorized and approved only for non-selected officers whose records contained a material error when they were considered by a promotion selection board.  PERSCOM stated that a material error was of such a nature that, in the judgment of the reviewing official, had it been corrected at the time the individual was considered by the board that failed to recommend him for promotion, it would have resulted in a reasonable chance that the individual would have been selected for promotion.  PERSCOM continued by saying that his report was processed on 10 July 2001, but should have arrived on or before 3 July 2001, and since it was not a mandatory OER, its absence from his file did not constitute a basis for promotion reconsideration.  

Army Regulation 600-8-29 prescribes policies and procedures governing promotion of Army officers on the active duty list.  Paragraph 1-33 pertains to information provided to selection boards and states in pertinent part that evaluation reports for officers in the zone of consideration must be administratively correct and received in Evaluation Reports Branch, PERSCOM, by the due date identified in the selection board notice announcing the zone of consideration and date the board convenes, in order to be provided to selection boards.  It also states that evaluation reports that have not been processed through the Evaluation Reports Branch will not be given to a board.  Exceptions apply to other than complete the record reports.    

Paragraph 7-2 states in pertinent part that special selection boards may be convened when HQDA discovers that the board that considered an officer did not have before it some material information (SSB discretionary).  An officer will not be considered or reconsidered for promotion by an SSB when an administrative error was immaterial, or the officer, in exercising reasonable diligence, could have discovered and corrected the error in the ORB (Officer Record Brief) or the OMPF (Official Military Personnel File).  The SSB will not consider an officer for promotion when the board [selection board] did not consider correspondence to the board president that was delivered to PERSCOM after the cutoff date for such correspondence established in the promotion board zone of consideration message.

MILPER Message Number 01-114, 12 March 2001, provided information concerning the FY01 Colonel, Army Nurse Corps promotion board zones of consideration, stated that the selection board would convene on or about           10 July 2001, and that in order to be eligible for consideration by the board, all evaluation reports must be received, error free, in the Evaluation Reports Branch, PERSCOM, not later than 3 July 2001.

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.  Notwithstanding the processing error, the applicant himself should have ensured that his evaluation report was processed in time to be considered by the selection board, especially in view of the effect the report could have on his career.  Further, It would appear to this Board that the applicant should have had no difficulty in ensuring that his report was submitted on time in view of his proximity to PERSCOM.        

2.  PERSCOM has determined that there is no material error, that is, the inclusion of the report would not have resulted in his selection for promotion.  This Board believes that there is no error or injustice done the applicant, and consequently, no justification for promotion reconsideration by a special selection board.

3.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.   

4.  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 that requirement.

5.  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:

__CG___  ________  __JL____  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  __GDP__  ________  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002067599	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020425	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.	1043	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.