IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 June 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080009504 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that he be promoted to lieutenant colonel with a date of rank of 28 February 2006. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that based on his date of rank as a captain, he should have been promoted to major on 25 February 1999. This would have made him eligible for consideration by the February 2006 lieutenant colonel selection board. 3. The applicant provides, in support of his application copies of his 3 July 2007 promotion orders to major; a 4 May 2005 letter informing him the Board had found in his favor on his request for promotion to captain; a 3 July 2007 letter advising him of selection to promotion to major; suspension of favorable actions release, dated 3 July 2007; record of assignments; and the ABCMR Record of Proceedings dated 20 May 2004 case. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant, a U. S. Army Reserve (USAR) officer, was erroneously not considered for promotion to captain. Following the Board's 20 May 2004 decision, a special selection board considered his records and he was promoted to captain with a date of rank of 26 February 1992 and a promotion eligibility date of 25 February 1999. 2. Upon his completion of the military education requirement, he was promoted to major with an effective date and a date of rank of 13 July 2007. 3. During the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the Human Resources Command (HRC), St. Louis, Mo. The Chief, Special Actions Branch, DA Promotions pointed out that the applicant was in the zones for consideration for promotion to major from 1998 through 2006, but was not considered because he had not completed the military education requirement (an officer advanced course) until 29 September 2006. The opinion also noted that the governing directive, Army Regulation 135-155, provides at paragraph 4-21e(1) that, when an officer's maximum time in grade is prior to the date of a promotion board, the promotion date and effective date can be no earlier than the date of approval of the board results. Disapproval of his request was recommended. 4. The applicant rebutted the advisory by maintaining, in effect, that he bore no responsibility for his current situation. He also maintained that he had completed the officer advanced course in a timely manner once he was promoted to captain. He believes the time in grade and education requirements should be waived and that his record should be corrected to show that he was promoted to major in a timely manner, " for me to be promoted to the proper rank of Lieutenant Colonel." 5. The applicant also forwarded officer evaluation reports for the periods 20050114 – 20060113 and 20060114 – 20070113 as a captain and 20080113-20090112 as a major. His rater marked on each, "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote." The senior rater marked the "Best Qualified" box on each and ranked the applicant in the center of mass on the latest report. 6. Army Pamphlet 600–2 (The Armed Forces Officer), chapter 4 (Planning Your Career), states, "… a. Career planning has only one basic rule. The individual officer is responsible for what happens to him or her…." DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that the time in grade and military education requirements be waived and that he be retroactively promoted to major and immediately considered for promotion to lieutenant colonel under the 2006 criteria. 2. 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 system are widely known and specific details such as board dates and promotion zones are widely published in official, quasi-official and unofficial publications, and in official communications. Given that the applicant knew or should have known that he would be in the zone of consideration for promotion to captain in 1992, he was not reasonably prudent when it appears it took about 10 years for him to discover he had been inadvertently omitted for promotion to CPT. 3. 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. _______ _ __X_____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080009504 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080009504 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1