MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  26 February 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2001063243

	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. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		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:  Removal of his discharge and second passover for promotion.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was not notified of his first passover that would have allowed him to correct his non-promotable status.  He also states that he was not aware of his second passover, until he received his discharge, which was sent to the wrong address and arrived after the suspense date. 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the USAR on 14 May 1978, and entered active duty on 13 June 1978.

He was promoted to the rank of captain/0-3 on 1 February 1982.

On 1 August 1983, the applicant was honorably separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-120, chapter 3, for miscellaneous reasons.  He was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).

On 2 August 1984, the applicant was honorably discharged from the USAR (Reinforcement) under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-175.

On 5 May 1993, the applicant was reappointed as a USAR commissioned officer at the highest grade held.  

On 25 May 1993, orders were published assigning the applicant to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) with an effective date of 17 May 1993, in the rank of captain.  

Information provided by the Army Reserve Personnel Command (AR-PERSCOM) revealed that the applicant was considered, but not selected by the 2000 Major, Department of the Army Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB) due to education requirements.  He was also considered, but not selected by the 2001 RCSB due to miscellaneous reasons.  Information also revealed that there was no change in the applicant’s address on file at the time of the 2001 RCSB and that there was no evidence to show that his notification was returned.

The applicant was honorably discharged from the USAR on 1 January 2002, under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-175.

Army Regulation 135-155 prescribes the policies and procedures for promotion of Reserve officers.  The regulation provides that mandatory selection boards will be convened each year to consider Army Reserve officers in an active status for promotion to captain through lieutenant colonel.  The regulation provides that in order to be qualified for promotion to major an individual must have completed 
Combined Arms Services Staff School (CAS3), 7 years of time in grade (TIG) as a captain, and an officer advanced course (OAC) on or before the convening date of the respective promotion board.

In pertinent part, Army Regulation 135-155 states that an officer who twice fails to be selected for promotion to captain, major, or lieutenant colonel will not again be considered for promotion and will be removed from an active status.

Army Regulation 135-175 provides policy, criteria, and procedures governing the separation of officers of the Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) and the United States Army Reserve (USAR), except for officers serving on active duty or active duty training exceeding 90 days.  Paragraph 4-4 pertains to the removal from an active status.  It states, in pertinent part, that officers in the grade of first lieutenant, captain, or major who completed their statutory military obligation, will be discharged for failure to be selected for promotion after second consideration by a DA Reserve Components Selection Board.

Army Regulation 140-10, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the assignment, attachment, detail, and transfer of USAR soldiers.  Chapter 7 of the regulation relates to the removal of soldiers from an active status and states, in pertinent part, that soldiers removed from an active status will be discharged or, if qualified and if they so request, will be transferred to the Retired Reserve.
Paragraph 7-4 requires removal of officers who are twice not selected for promotion to chief warrant officer three, chief warrant officer four, captain, major,
or lieutenant colonel.

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

1.  The Board notes that the applicant was properly considered for promotion by the 2000 and 2001 RCSB’s.  The Board also notes that he was not selected for promotion by the 2000 and 2001 RCSB’s and that he was subsequently discharged based on his nonselections.

2.  The Board notes that applicant’s contention that he was not notified of his 
first passover that would have allowed him to correct his non-promotable status;
however, information provided by AR-PERSCOM revealed that the applicant’s first passover was for education requirements, which must be completed prior to the convening date of the respective board.

3.  The Board notes his contention that he was not aware of his second passover until he received his discharge, which was sent to the wrong address and that arrived after the suspense date.  The Board also notes that information provided by AR-PERSCOM revealed that there was no change in the applicant’s address on file at the time of the 2001 RCSB.

4.  The Board notes that it is the applicant’s responsibility to keep an accurate address on file at all times.  However, based on information from AR-PERSCOM,
there was no evidence of record to show that his notification was returned.
Therefore, he is not entitled to removal of his discharge and second passover.

5.  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.

6.  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

__jl___  ___rd___  __rw____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001063243	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020226	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR2001063243	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  1023		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.