RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 April 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060014249 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. x 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 that he be promoted to the rank of captain (CPT) and that he be paid all back pay and allowances from that date. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that he was selected for promotion to the rank of CPT by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 promotion selection board and should have been promoted to the rank of CPT effective 1 April 2006; however, his promotion to the rank of CPT was held up pending the outcome of a promotion review board (PRB) and was not resolved until 25 September 2006. However, by the time the PRB determined that he could be promoted, he had already been released from active duty (REFRAD), transferred to the United States Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement), and could not be promoted. 3. The applicant provides a memorandum from the Chief, Promotions Branch at Human Resources Command – St. Louis (HRC-STL) and a copy of the promotion standing list indicating his sequence number. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant was commissioned as a USAR second lieutenant on 9 August 2002 and was ordered to active duty on 9 March 2003. He completed the armor officer basic course and on 19 September 2003, he was transferred to Schweinfurt, Germany for assignment to a cavalry regiment. He was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant (1LT) on 8 August 2004. 2. On 24 January 2006, the FY06 CPT Army Competitive Category Promotion Selection List was released. The applicant was on the list with a sequence number of 1248. 3. On 7 July 2006, the applicant received a change of rater Officer Evaluation Report covering the period from 21 June 2005 to 12 May 2006 evaluating him as the assistant squadron S4. In Part V, under Performance and Potential Evaluation, the applicant’s rater gave him a rating of “Unsatisfactory Performance – Do Not Promote”. He further indicated that the applicant did not have the potential to serve as a captain and should not be sent to the CPT’s Career Course. 4. The applicant’s Senior Rater (SR) indicated in Part VII that the applicant should not be promoted, that his performance had been substandard and that he had no potential to serve in command or staff positions as a CPT. 5. The report was considered adverse and as such was referred to the applicant for comment and on 26 June 2006, he submitted a Memorandum for Record in which he disputed the adverse remarks on his OER. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he submitted an appeal of the OER to the Officer Special Review Board (OSRB). 6. It appears that the applicant’s chain of command notified officials at the Human Resources Command of the OER and the applicant was flagged pending a review by a PRB. 7. Meanwhile, the applicant was honorably REFRAD on 24 July 2006 in the rank of 1LT, under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-21, paragraph 3-5 for miscellaneous/general reasons. He had served 3 years, 4 months and 16 days of total active service and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement). 8. On 27 September 2006, the Chief, Promotions Branch, HRC-STL dispatched a memorandum to the applicant indicating that the applicant was flagged pending a PRB and that a review of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) showed that the applicant had received a “fully qualified” referred OER that was seen by the promotion board that selected him for CPT and therefore the PRB was terminated. 9. On 23 October 2006, the applicant voluntarily transferred to a USAR Troop Program Unit (TPU) and on 25 January 2007, he was promoted to the rank of CPT based on his selection while on active duty and his assignment to a CPT’s position in the TPU. 10. Army Regulation 600-8-29 serves as the authority for the conduct of Promotion Review Boards. It provides, in pertinent part, that an officer may be referred to a PRB by his commander for receiving a referred OER or Academic Evaluation Report (AER). In such cases, the Department of the Army will initiate a suspension of favorable personnel actions (FLAG) until the case is resolved. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant was selected for promotion to the rank of CPT while serving on active duty. However, he received a referred OER indicating that he should not be promoted to the rank of CPT and was referred to a PRB by his commander. 2. Although the PRB did not remove him from the CPT’s list, the applicant had already been REFRAD and transferred to the USAR. Accordingly, he could not be promoted off the active duty list (ADL). 3. However, the applicant subsequently transferred to a TPU and once he was placed in a CPT’s position, he was promoted to the rank of CPT based on his selection to CPT on the ADL. 4. The Board finds that the commander was justified in referring the applicant to a PRB given the “Do Not Promote” comments on his last active duty OER. 5. Inasmuch as the applicant elected not to remain on active duty to await the outcome of the PRB, he is not entitled to retro-active promotion to the rank of CPT. 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. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __x__ __x___ _x___ 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. ______xx________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20060014249 SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED 20070419 TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) DATE OF DISCHARGE YYYYMMDD DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR . . . . . DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION (DENY) REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1.131.0000 310/PR 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.