PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           26 June 2003                     
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003083608

	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. Walter T. Morrison 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Mr. Lawrence Foster 		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 reconsideration to chief warrant officer four.

3.  The applicant states that due to no fault of his own, his officer evaluation report dated 10 April 2002 was not included in his promotion packet.  The officer evaluation report previous to this one was 7 years old.  He believes he may have been selected had this officer evaluation report been included in his promotion packet.

4.  Based upon review by the Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Total Army Personnel Command, the applicant’s official military personnel file (OMPF) contained material error when he was considered and non-selected by the 2002 Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB).

5.  Current promotion policy specifies that promotion reconsideration by a Standby Advisory Board (STAB) may only be based on erroneous non-consideration or material error that existed in the record at the time of consideration.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s records contained material error when reviewed for promotion to chief warrant officer four by the 2002 RCSB due to the missing officer evaluation report and should now be submitted to a STAB for promotion reconsideration.

2.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by placing the contested officer evaluation report of the individual concerned on his OMPF.

2.  That following administrative implementation of the foregoing, his records be submitted to a duly constituted STAB under 2002 criteria, as appropriate.

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

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__LF___  _WTM____  _LE____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		_Walter T. Morrison_____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003083608	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030626	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.	131.01	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.