IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 May 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150002906 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, in effect, that a DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER)) for the period 9 May 2014 to 22 May 2014 (hereafter referred to as the contested DA Form 1059) be removed from his official military personnel file (OMPF). 2. The applicant states: a. The contested DA Form 1059 showing a marginal rating for the Reserve Component (RC) Military Intelligence Captains Career Course (MICCC) Phase 2 was entered into the interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) while he was requesting a review from the school house. Once the review was complete, a new DA Form 1059 showing he achieved course standards was entered in iPERMS. b. Both the "marginal" and "achieved course standards" DA Forms 1059 are in his record. Both list completion dates of 22 May 2014. The school house entered into iPERMS the incorrect version while he was requesting a review. 3. The applicant provides: * the contested DA Form 1059 * the new DA Form 1059 for the period 9 May 2014 through 22 May 2014 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant had prior enlisted service in the U.S. Marine Corps. On 8 January 2011, he was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve. 2. On 9 May 2014, he entered the RC-MICCC Phase 2 and completed the course on 22 May 2014. 3. His DA Form 1059, item 13 (Has the student demonstrated the academic potential for selection to higher level schooling/training?), shows the entry "No," and comments explain that he "marginally ac[h]ieved the MI [CCC] standards by graduating with an academic average of 83.67%. The individual student assessment plan dated 13 Mar 14 states a student will receive a marginally achieved [DA Form] 1059 if their final [grade point average] is below 85%." 4. The applicant requested a review from the school based on not receiving any individual counseling or having the opportunity to have his course work re-graded. Furthermore, he believed that there were discrepancies in the grading standards for the RC-MICCC which resulted in a variance of grade averages across three separate squads. 5. His record contains a second DA Form 1059 for the RC-MICCC Phase 2, dated 22 May 2014, showing he achieved course standards. 6. The contested DA Form 1059 is now in the applicant's OMPF as is the new DA Form 1059 for the period of 9 May 2014 to 22 May 2014. 7. Department of the Army Pamphlet 623-3 (Evaluation Reporting System), paragraph 2–17, states in reviewing of officer and academic evaluation reports: a. In most instances, the senior rater officer evaluation reports, or the reviewing officer or reviewer (AERs), will perform the final rating chain review ensuring that— (1) Evaluation rating chains are correct. (2) Evaluations rendered by rating officials are examined and discrepancies are clarified or resolved. (3) All members of the rating chain have complied with this regulation and procedures prescribed in DA Pamphlet 623–3. (4) The communication process between the rater and rated officer has taken place and is documented properly as described in paragraph 3–4 and/or in accordance with academic counseling standards established by the military or civilian institution. (5) All comments are consistent with the counseling, support forms (or equivalent), or other communications between rating officials and the rated Soldier during the rating period. (6) A copy of the completed evaluation is returned to the rated officer at the conclusion of the final review. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends the contested DA Form 1059 should be removed based on the second achieved course standards DA Form 1059, also in his OMPF, and there should only be one DA Form 1059 for the period of 9 May 2014 to 22 May 2014. 2. In view of the above, it would be equitable to remove the contested DA Form 1059 from his OMPF and leave the DA Form 1059 showing he achieved course standards for the period of 9 May 2014 to 22 May 2014. In addition, the memorandum from the applicant, dated 21 May 2014, contesting the DA Form 1059 (marginal) for the period of 9 May 2014 to 22 May 2014 should also be removed. 3. This Record of Proceedings (ROP) should not be filed in the applicant's record, since it may be prejudicial to the applicant. BOARD VOTE: ____X___ ____X___ ____X___ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was 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 removing the following documents from his OMPF: * DA Form 1059 (marginal) from 9 May 2014 to 22 May 2014 * The memorandum from the applicant dated 21 May 2014 contesting the (marginal) DA Form 1059 for the period of 9 May 2014 to 22 May 2014 2. The ROP will not be filed in the applicant's OMPF to since it may be prejudicial to the applicant in future promotions. _______ _ _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) AR20150000027 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150002906 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1