MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

		IN THE CASE OF:     

		BOARD DATE:           28 October 2003
		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003087403

	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. Raymond J. Wagner		Chairperson	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		Member	
	Ms. Marla J. Troup		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:  That his Federal Recognition as a warrant officer be antedated prior to 15 November 2001 and that the results of the 2001 Reserve Officer Federal Recognition Board be removed from his records.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that prior to his consideration by the 2001 Reserve Officer Federal Recognition Board in which he was to be considered for promotion from the rank of first lieutenant (1LT) to captain (CPT), he submitted a request for appointment as a warrant officer in order to avoid being passed over for promotion to CPT due to not having met the educational requirements for promotion.  However, due to unnecessary delays in the processing of his request, his request was not processed prior to the board and he was twice nonselected for promotion.  He continues by stating that he requested an appointment to warrant officer in order to complete his civilian education and possibly later re-obtain his status as a commissioned officer; however, the fact that he was twice non-selected prevents him from doing so at a future date and is due to the inefficient handling of his request.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his original request for appointment, his separation orders and his oath of office for appointment as a warrant.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were not available for review by the Board.  Information contained herein was obtained from documents submitted by the applicant with his application which show:

He was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the Texas Army National Guard (TXARNG) on 7 August 1993 and was promoted to the rank of 1LT on 6 August 1996.

On 1 September 2001, while serving as an aviation 1LT in the TXARNG, the applicant submitted a request for appointment as a warrant officer one (WO1).

The applicant's request was received at the Adjutant General's Department of the TXARNG on 9 October 2001 and was returned without action on 20 November 2001.  The memorandum returning his request indicates that the applicant was scheduled to appear before a Federal Recognition Board (FRB) in October; however, no Federal Recognition Board was convened in October.

Meanwhile, on 12 November 2001, a Department of the Army Reserve Components Selection Board was convened to consider officers for promotion to the rank of CPT.  The applicant was not selected for the second time and on 26 March 2002, a notification was sent to the applicant informing him that he must be discharged no later than 1 October 2002.

On 23 January 2003, he was appointed as a WO1 in the TXARNG.

Army Regulation 135-175 serves as the authority for the discharge of National Guard and USAR officers from their status as Reserves of the Army.  It provides, in pertinent part, that members of the National Guard and Army Reserve will be removed from an active status, with or without their consent, regardless of the length of commissioned service, for failure to be selected for promotion after second consideration by a Department of the Army Reserve Components Selection Board. 

Army Regulation 135-155 prescribes the policies and procedures used in the selection and promotion of commissioned officers of the Army National Guard.  It provides, in pertinent part, that officers serving in the rank of 1LT will be considered for promotion to the rank of CPT after attaining 4 years in the grade of 1LT.

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 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.

2.  The Board has noted the applicant's contention that his unit unduly delayed his request for appointment as a WO1 and finds it to be without merit.  He submitted his request in September and was scheduled for a FRB in October; however, no FRB was convened in October, thus the applicant was twice nonselected for promotion to the rank of captain by the selection board that convened on 12 November 2001 and was subsequently discharged.

3.  The Board does not find that his request was unnecessarily delayed; however, the Board does find that the applicant simply waited too long before he decided to submit his request for appointment as a WO1.  If he believed that he was not going to be selected again, he should have submitted his request after his first nonselection in order to avoid any delays or cancellation of boards that could occur.  The applicant simply waited too long and did not anticipate that a FRB might not be able to consider him before he was twice nonselected.  The applicant's failure to properly anticipate the amount of time it would take to process his request does not constitute an error or injustice by his command.

4.  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

___mt___  __lds____  __rjw ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087403	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2003/10/28	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  14	102.0000/APPT AS WO	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.