MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

		IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE:          16 September 2003                  
		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003084419

	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	
	Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		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:  That he be promoted to lieutenant colonel (LTC) by the Board.  Alternatively that he be reconsidered for promotion to LTC by a special selection board.  [The applicant has been informed that administrative relief regarding his contention relating to the equal opportunity instructions given to the promotion selection board is available by application to the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM).]   

APPLICANT STATES:  That he verified and corrected his records before the 1999 fiscal year (FY99) Judge Advocate (JA) LTC promotion selection board.  Due to circumstances beyond his control, the selection board considered inaccurate records.  He states that a sergeant submitted an incorrect copy of his Officer Record Brief (ORB).  In support of his application, he submits copies of both versions of his ORB and a letter from the, then active duty, JA officer who helped him review his records.

He contends, in effect, that the incorrect assignment history shown on the Officer Record Brief that the selection board considered would have given the impression that he was, "Homesteading."  That is, he was accepting non-challenging assignments in order to stay in the same geographic area.
 
EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:  The applicant, a Regular Army, JA major was non-selected for promotion by the FY 99 and FY 00 promotion selection boards.  He was selected for and, in 2001, accepted selective continuation on active duty.  

Copies of the two versions of the ORB show that the FY 99 board considered the earlier version of his ORB.  

The applicant requested administrative relief by application to the PERSCOM.  The Chief Promotions Branch, informed him, in a 4 October 2000 memorandum, that reconsideration by a special selection board was not warranted because the error was not material.  The members of the promotion selection board had access to his OERs which accurately reflected his assignment history.  

A review of the applicant's 18 available OERs shows that he was consistently rated as exceeding standards and recommended for promotion ahead of his peers [outstanding and best qualified under the new system].  Except for four above center of mass evaluations as a senior captain, he has been exclusively, rated at the center of mass by his senior raters. 

Army Regulation 600-8-29 (Officer Promotion) provides that a reconsideration by a special selection board is not warranted if an administrative error was immaterial. 

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.  There is no available evidence to support the applicant's assumption that "Homesteading" caused his non-selection for promotion.  

2.  The Board carefully considered the applicant's contentions and evidence and concluded that the error was immaterial in that the promotion selection board had access to the applicant's OERs which accurately reflected his assignment history.

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. 

4.  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

__FNE__  __MHM__  __KAH __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030916	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION		
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.