RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 November 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050001784 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. Lester Echols Chairperson Mr. John E. Denning Member Ms. Jeanette R. McCants Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, consideration before a selective continuation (SELCON) board for reinstatement in an active Reserve status for a period of time sufficient to earn a 20-year letter for retirement purposes. 2. The applicant states that no accurate information was available on preferred procedures to request selective continuation due to his two-time non-selection for promotion to lieutenant colonel. Guidance from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (ASA) Manpower and Reserve Affairs (M&RA) on how to proceed was not received in time. He has been discharged since 1 August 2004 in accordance with Army regulations governing the separation of officers twice passed over for promotion to lieutenant colonel. His non-selection was based on the basis of his educational status, having failed to complete 50 percent of the Command and General Staff Officer Course prior to his promotion board dates. 3. He also states that he understands the ASA M&RA has the authority to direct his further retention within the Army Reserve as a major. Due to the difficulties establishing contact with the appropriate knowledgeable action officer; however, he was discharged before any action toward his retention could be accomplished. The last significant correspondence suggested that he apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). It appears there is a precedent for selective retention boards to consider just such a case as his. Information papers from the Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 and FY 2002 SELCON boards seem to indicate a very favorable selection rate for those majors considered under such a board, provided their service was of otherwise good character, as he believes his to be. The only difficulty in his case was that he had to discover the existence of such a board on his own, as branch managers seemed to be unaware of the procedures. These boards do not seem to be held on a regular basis. He requests the ABCMR favorably consider initiating actions necessary to reinstate him as part of the Army Reserve. He is still confident that he can make a meaningful contribution to the Army Reserve for several more years. 4. The applicant provides copies of the information papers for the FY 2001 and FY 2002 Selective Continuation (SELCON) Boards – Army Competitive Category (ACC) Majors; electronic mail correspondence from ASA M&RA; his reply to the Deputy ASA M&RA; and his officer evaluation reports (OERs) for the periods 15 April 2002 through 14 April 2003, 21 July 2003 through 1 August 2003, and 5 August 2003 through 26 September 2003. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's military records show he was appointed in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) as a second lieutenant effective 6 May 1983 and entered on active duty effective 29 June 1983. He was promoted to captain effective 1 June 1987. 2. The applicant was released from active duty effective 21 April 1992, for failure of selection for permanent promotion and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement). 3. The applicant was promoted to major effective 5 May 1996. He was considered but was not selected for promotion to lieutenant colonel by the 2002 and 2003 Reserve Components Selection Boards (RCSB). 4. In a letter, dated 24 March 2004, to the Deputy ASA M&RA, the applicant requested further retention in the Army Reserve, as an exception to the normal provisions of Army Regulation 140-10. The applicant stated that he wished to be retained in the Army Reserve until the 20 year mark for retirement eligibility. The current provisions of Army Regulation 140-10 provide for retention of an officer twice non-selected for promotion if that officer has completed 18 qualifying years of service for retirement purposes. However, the ASA M&RA, or higher authority, may allow further retention of an officer not eligible for other exceptions. 5. On 9 April 2004, the Human Resources Command (HRC) - St. Louis, Missouri, published orders D-04-412446, discharging the applicant from the USAR, with an effective date of 1 August 2004, based on his two non-selections for promotion. 6. On 10 March 2005, the HRC – St. Louis, published orders D-04-412446R, voiding the applicant's 1 August 2004 discharge. 7. Based on the revocation of his discharge orders he was identified for consideration for promotion to lieutenant colonel. He was considered by the 2005 RCSB that convened on 13 September and recessed on 7 October 2005. The board results have not been released. 8. On 2 November 2005, the HRC – St. Louis, published orders D-11-535243, discharging the applicant from the USAR effective 1 August 2004. The applicant was provided a copy of the orders. 9. The applicant provides copies of information papers for the FY 2001 and FY 2002 SELCON Army ACC Majors that provide information concerning selective continuation of ACC for an additional period of active duty service for FY 2001 and FY 2002. He also provides copies of his OER's for the periods ending 14 April 2003, 1 August 2003, and 26 September 2003. 10. On 26 July 2004, an ASA M&RA staff member advised the applicant that, although the ASA M&RA was the authority for selective continuation actions, they still require coordination and staffing. The applicant was advised that he should submit his request to the Commander, HRC – St. Louis, and realistically, since no one had received his request, he did not see how this would be accomplished prior to his discharge date. The staff member also advised the applicant of his available options including the option to apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records, or apply for an appointment as a warrant officer, or contact an Army Reserve recruiter in his area and request determination of entry into the Reserve Components as an enlisted Solider. 11. The applicant's Retirement Points Summary Sheet, dated 25 August 2004, shows he earned 9 qualifying years from 6 May 1983 through 5 May 1992. He earned no points other than membership, from 6 May 1992 through 5 May 1997. He earned 7 qualifying years from 6 May 1997 through 1 August 2004 for a total of 16 qualifying years for retirement purposes. He was not issued, nor was he eligible to have issued a notification of qualification for retired pay at age 60 (20-Year Letter) prior to his discharge. 12. The Office of Promotions, Reserve Promotions, HRC – St. Louis, verified that their office has not been directed by the SA to conduct a SELCON board for officers considered by the 2002 and 2003 RCSB's. 13. Army Regulation 135–155, prescribes the policies and procedures for the promotion of Reserve Components officers. This regulation specifies that officers in the grade of major who have failed selection for promotion to lieutenant colonel a second time will be removed from active status, unless subsequently placed on a promotion list, selected for continuation, or retained in the Ready Reserve with 18 or more but less than 20 qualifying years of service for retired pay. 14. Army Regulation 135-155, also specifics that, subject to the needs of the Army, officers pending separation because of having twice failed to be selected for promotion to lieutenant colonel, may be selectively continued on the Reserve Active Status List in their present grade. The Secretary of the Army (SA) may direct a SELCON board to consider officers for continuation when required by the needs of the Reserve of the Army. A SELCON board must recommend officers for continuation and the SA must approve the recommendation before officers may be continued for 3 years from the approval date of the SELCON board. The SA may adjust the period of selective continuation. An officer not selected by a SELCON board will be discharged. 15. Army Regulation 135-155, also specifies that the Commander, HRC, Office of Promotion, may administratively delete a name from a mandatory promotion board report before Presidential approval. The board report becomes a promotion list after being approved by the President or his designee. If an officer is determined to be ineligible for consideration because the officer was not in an active status or was in an active status in error at the time of consideration, the Commander, HRC, Office of Promotions, will verify the officer's ineligibility and request removal or administrative deletion of the officer's name from the approved promotion list. 16. Army Regulation 135-180 also specifies, in part, that to be eligible for retired pay an individual must have attained age 60, and completed a minimum of 20 years of qualifying service; and that subsequent to 1 July 1949, qualifying service is granted only for each year of service an individual earns 50 or more retirement points. It also specifies that eligible members must make application for retired pay. 17. The term “good years” is an unofficial term used to mean years in which 50 or more retirement points are earned during each year, and which count as qualifying years of service for retirement benefits at age 60. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to consideration before a SELCON board for reinstatement in an active Reserve status for a period of time sufficient to earn a 20-year letter for retirement purposes. He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests. 2. The applicant's contentions have been noted; however, the applicant stated that he failed to complete the required military education for promotion to lieutenant colonel prior to his promotion boards. Implicit in the Army's promotion system is the universally accepted and frequently discussed principle that officers have a responsibility for their own careers. The general requirements and workings of the promotion system are widely known, specific information on promotion and SELCON boards is widely published in official publications. The applicant knew, or should have known, that based on his second non-selection he would be separated unless selected for continuation. He also has not satisfactorily shown that he was prevented from requesting and receiving consideration by a SELCON board prior to his discharge from the USAR. 3. Although there are provisions for continuation boards based on the directive of the SA, the Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, HRC – St. Louis, verified that they have not been directed by the SA to conduct such a board for majors considered by the 2002 and 2003 RCSB's. 4. The applicant's discharge of 1 August 2004 was erroneously voided in March 2005 and he was identified for promotion consideration. The applicant's consideration for promotion to lieutenant colonel by the 2005 RCSB and the results of the board are unknown at this time. He was reissued orders discharging him from the USAR effective 1 August 2004, therefore, whether he is selected or not, his consideration by that board is invalid based on his ineligibility. 5. A review of his records confirmed that he had not completed a minimum of 18 years of qualifying service for retention for completion of 20 qualifying years of service for retired pay benefits at age 60. 6. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING _JRM___ __LE___ __JED___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _ Lester Echols_ ___ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20050001784 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 2005/11/17 TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION DENY REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 102.09 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.