MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           21 October 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003088049

	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:

	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Chairperson	
	Mr. William D. Powers		Member	
	Mr. Frank C. Jones, II		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, promotion reconsideration to chief warrant officer three (CW3).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, he was not notified of promotion consideration.  He was considered for CW3 without his knowledge and his first notification of being considered and not selected was dated 6 August 2003.

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

He was appointed in the Reserve as a warrant officer one effective 8 June 1988 and entered on active duty effective 9 June 1988.  He was promoted to CW2 effective 9 June 1990.

He was separated from the active duty effective 19 August 1992 for expiration of his active duty service commitment and transferred to a Reserve troop program unit.

He enlisted in the Florida Army National Guard (FLARNG) as a sergeant, pay grade E-5, effective 30 April 1996.

The Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Total Army Personnel Command, (PERSCOM) verified that he was reappointed in the Reserve as a CW2 effective 26 September 2001.  Based on his 5 years, 4 months and 26 days break in service as a commissioned officer, his date of rank for CW2 was adjusted to 5 November 1995.

He was considered and not selected for promotion to CW3 by the 2002 RCSB.  The boards did not divulge the reason(s) except that it was not for lack of military education.

His board consideration file included his pertinent documents and there was no indication of material error when considered by the 2002 RCSB.

He was considered and selected for promotion to CW3 by the 2003 RCSB.  The President approved the board results effective 26 August 2003.

The Chief, Special Actions Branch, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, PERSCOM, expressed the opinion that the applicant was promoted to CW2 on 9 June 1990.  His break in service of 5 years, 4 months and 26 days adjusted his date of rank to 5 November 1995.  Based on the adjusted date of rank, and 6 years time in grade requirement, the applicant’s promotion eligibility date (PED) to CW3 was 5 November 2001.  Upon determination of his PED it was revealed that the applicant was in the zone for promotion consideration by the 2002 RCSB.  He was considered and not selected for promotion.  The applicant’s

board consideration file included his pertinent documents; therefore, he does not have a basis for consideration by a special selection board under 2002 criteria.  In view the facts presented, it was recommended his request be disapproved.

The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for acknowledgement/
rebuttal on 28 August 2003.  He did not respond.

Army Regulation 135-155 prescribes the policies and procedures for promotion of Reserve officers.  This regulation specifies that promotion reconsideration by a promotion advisory board for all commissioned warrant officers 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.

This regulation also specifies that promotion board selections are based on those soldiers that are best qualified.  Factors considered during board proceedings include, but are not limited to, evaluation reports, assignments and levels of responsibility.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion, it is concluded:

1.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to promotion reconsideration to CW3.  He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.

2.  The Board notes the applicant’s contentions; however, his records indicate they were complete and without material error when he was considered for promotion to CW3 and he was simply not selected.  He has not shown otherwise.  The applicant had a break in service of 5 years, 4 months, and 26 days, which adjusted his date of rank for CW2 from 9 June 1990 to 5 November 1995.  He was appropriately considered by the 2002 CW3 RCSB, held subsequent to his reappointment in the ARNG.

3.  The Board also notes that promotion and retention is keenly competitive, and that many officers will not be selected.  As shown in this case, promotion and retention is not automatic based on qualifications alone, but includes a 

competitive process of a promotion board determining an individual's potential and ability to perform at the higher grade, and the needs of the service.

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 this 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:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__FCJ      _   _WDP  _  _MHM  _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003088049	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20031021	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.	131.01	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.