MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            29 July 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003083692

	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:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison . 		Member	
	Mr. Thomas E. O'Shaughnessy, Jr. 		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:  Removal of his non-selection for promotion to major by the 2002 Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB) and promotion reconsideration.

APPLICANT STATES:  That being in an inactive status for 8 years, per regulatory guidance, Army Regulation 135-155, paragraph 2-6, “an officer returned to an active status after having been in an inactive or retired status will not be considered for a Reserve of the Army promotion until at least 1 year after the date of return to an active status.”  By regulation, being deployed and having little time to assemble his promotion packet caused undue consternation for the officer personnel manager in Montana and himself.  In support of his application he submits copies of his discharge and transfer documents, his Service School Academic Evaluation Report, his appointment orders, his order for active duty, his promotion consideration notification memorandum, his request for a special selection board (SSB), several officer evaluation reports (OER’s) and his denial letter for an SSB.

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

He was appointed in the Montana Army National Guard (MTARNG) as a second lieutenant effective 21 June 1986 and promoted to first lieutenant effective 20 June 1989.

He was promoted to captain effective 19 June 1993, with a date of rank of 18 December 1992.

He was separated from the MTARNG and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) effective 6 October 1993.

He was appointed in the MTARNG as a captain effective 11 September 2001.

He was ordered to active duty for special work for the period 7 November 2001 through 3 May 2002.

He was considered and not selected for promotion to major by the 2002 RCSB, which convened on 3 April 2002.  

On 16 September 2002, he requested promotion reconsideration to major by an SSB under 2002 criteria based on material error, missing OER’s.

On 12 November 2002, the Chief, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Total Army Personnel Command, advised the applicant that a review of his record that was considered by the 2002 RCSB revealed all critical elements were present in the board consideration file.  Critical (material error documents) are
highest civilian and military education, awards of the Silver Star and above and OER’s.  He was also advised that the contested OER’s were seen in hard copy; therefore, he did not have a basis for an SSB.

Army Regulation 135-155 prescribes the policies and procedures for promotion of Reserve officers.  This regulation specifies that promotion reconsideration by an SSB 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 regulation also 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.

The regulation also states that to be eligible for consideration for promotion to the next higher grade, an ARNG or Reserve officer must have continuously performed service on either the Reserve Active Status List (RASL) or the Active Duty List (or a combination of both) during the 1-year period ending on the convening date of the promotion board.  Service in the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) is part of the RASL as is a mobilized USAR officer on active duty for less than 3 years.

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.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to promotion reconsideration to major.  He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.

2.  The Board notes his contentions that his file contained material error when it was considered by the 2002 RCSB and that he should not have been considered until 1 year after his release from active duty.  However, based on a review of his promotion consideration file it was revealed that the contested OER’s were seen in hardcopy and are not a basis for promotion reconsideration by an SSB.

3.  The Board also notes that Army Regulation 135-155, paragraph 2-6 is not applicable to the applicant.  The applicant was a Reserve officer who continuously performed service on the RASL while in the IRR and while in an 

active duty status during the 1-year period ending on the convening date of 3 April 2002 of the 2002 RCSB.  He was appropriately considered for a Reserve promotion as a Reserve officer on the RASL.

4.  His records were complete and without material error when reviewed by the 2002 RCSB and he has not shown otherwise.

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

6.  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.

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:
3
________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_MKP___  _WTM___  _TOE___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003083692	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030729	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.	131.10	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.