IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 February 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160007525 BOARD VOTE: ___x_____ ___x___ ____x____ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 February 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160007525 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. deleting the entries from block 8 of the DA Form 1059-1 (Civilian Institution Academic Evaluation Report) for the period ending 30 March 2012 and b. referring the applicant's file to a Special Selection Board under the applicable Fiscal Year 2016 lieutenant colonel criteria. ______________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. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 February 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160007525 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 an appeal of the Fiscal Year 2016 (FY16) Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Selection Board, referral to a Special Selection Board (SSB), and correction of his DA Form 1059-1 (Civilian Institution Academic Evaluation Report (CIAER)) for the period ending 30 March 2012. 2. The applicant states based on the attached letter from Dr. R____, the Senior German Professor and Director of Graduate Studies: a. His CIAER, dated 1 April 2012, should be corrected by deleting the entries from block 8. This block 8 should be left blank. The entries shown do not comport with the comments in Block 11, which states his degree was completed and lists no negative performance. b. The applicant was the first U.S. Army Student to attend the Universitaet der Bundeswehr Masters in International Security Studies program. Dr. R____ annotated block 8 with a checkmark and entered a "YES" entry by mistake. Dr. R____ misunderstood the wording and meaning for block 8. He did not realize the current entries would reflect negatively on him. Dr. R____ did not intend to portray any negative performance on the applicant's part, and this is clear in his comments in Block 11 of the CIAER. It is also clear in Dr. R____'s letter explaining the circumstances of the error. 3. The applicant provides copies of a DA Form 1059-1 (CIAER) and a letter from Dr. R____. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant, a major with a date of rank of 1 November 2009, attended the first class of the Master of Arts in International Security Studies, at the Universitaet der Bundeswehr Muenchen/George C. Marshall Center, at Gernackerstrasse, Garmisch, Germany. 2. The CIAER shows in: a. Block 8 (This Is A Referred Report, Do You Wish To Make Comments?) is annotated with a checkmark and an annotation of “Yes.” b. Block 11: His performance was good. He received a grade of B+ for his overall performance and especially for his Master Thesis. [The applicant] was always very well prepared in class and in seminar. He delivered the required papers in time, even under high time pressure. He contributed to seminar discussions, but he can improve his discussion skills. His presentations in class and seminar showed a high degree of quality. His writing skills have greatly improved throughout the year, as shown in his Master Thesis. [The applicant] showed throughout the Academic Year his ability to expose himself to new topics and to engage in new fields of political sciences and security studies. c. Block 12 (Did Student Successfully Complete the Course?) “Yes” is marked. 3. This form is annotated to show the applicant was not available to sign the form. 4. This form is signed by Professor Dr. R____, the Senior German Professor. 5. Dr. R____ provided a statement, dated 21 June 2012, requesting that block 8 of the applicant's CIAER be corrected by deleting the entries indicating the report was a referred. This professor states this was the first time he dealt with U.S. military reports and misunderstood what the block 8 entry was to be used for. 6. An advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Officer Promotions, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (AHRC). The Chief stated the CIAER was marked as a referred report in error and that a reconsideration for promotion by an SSB under the Fiscal Year 2016 (FY16) Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) criteria is supported. 7. A copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant. He did not respond. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 630-3 (Evaluation Reporting System) states: a. Except to comply with this regulation and corresponding pamphlet (Department of the Army Pamphlet 623-3), no person may require changes be made to an individual's AER. Members of the rating chain, the appropriate administrative personnel office, or Head Quarters Department of the Army (HQDA) will point out obvious inconsistencies or administrative errors to appropriate rating officials. After needed corrections are made, the original forms, with authenticated signatures, will be sent to the appropriate HQDA processing office. b. Referred reports are provided to the student for acknowledgment and comment before being sent to HQDA for processing to completion. c. Academic evaluations report the accomplishments, potential, and limitations of individuals while attending courses of instruction or training. Only one AER will be authorized for each reporting period. The reporting official will be responsible for the accuracy of the information in the completed CIAER. DISCUSSION: 1. Based on the comments made by the rating official and the review by AHRC Promotions, the entries in block 8 of the CIAER were administrative error. 2. Based on the advisory opinion, correcting block 8 of the CIAER would be a basis for referring the applicant's file to an SSB for consideration for promotion under the FY16 LTC criteria. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160007525 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160007525 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2