BOARD DATE: 26 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000232 BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x____ ___x_____ ____x____ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 28 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000232 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined 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. BOARD DATE: 28 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000232 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, reinstatement in an active reserve status in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) and reconsideration for promotion to the rank of captain (CPT) by a special selection board (SSB) under the Fiscal Year 2013 (FY13) criteria. 2. The applicant states: a. She met all of the education requirements to be retained as a commissioned officer. She retained a Bachelor of Science degree from Alderson-Broaddus (A-B) College in 1993 prior to her first promotion board review in FY13. She was informed by her career manager for the first time in the fall of 2013 that her transcripts were not conferred. She reached out to A-B College for clarification, and they provided documentation for the CPT's Board; that documentation was not reviewed. b. During the FY 2014 (FY14) CPT promotion board, she was enrolled as a senior at Chatham University, where she graduated on 18 May 2015, intent on advancing into the Masters in Physician Assistant Program at Chatham University. She obtained over 214 civilian credits and completed and graduated from numerous military schools to include Quartermaster Basic Officer Leadership Course, Reserve Component Theater Sustainment Course, and the Sustainment Operations Course, which provided her with valuable tools that she has already used on her deployment overseas as an officer. 3. The applicant provides numerous documents from her official military personnel file (OMPF), organized as follows: * résumé of service career, undated * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 26 January 1990 * DD Form 214 for the period ending 16 December 1994 * mobilization and release from active duty (REFRAD) orders, dated 1 February 2005 and 3 February 2006 * DD Form 214 for the period ending 4 February 2006 * mobilization and REFRAD orders covering the period 18 March 2007 through 29 June 2008 * DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214), dated 9 June 2008 * DD Form 214 for the period ending 14 September 2008 * DD Form 214 for the period ending 16 August 2011 * mobilization, REFRAD, and travel orders covering the period 21 November 2011 through 30 March 2013 * DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated 14 January 2013 * DD Form 214 for the period ending 16 May 2013 * letter from A-B University, dated 6 May 2014 * email correspondence to and from A-B University, dated 6 June 2014 * two education waiver letters, dated 18 September 2014 * Bachelor of Arts diploma from Chatham University, conferred on 18 May 2015 * Chatham University unofficial transcripts, dated 18 May 2015 * email correspondence between the applicant, her career manager, and others within her chain of command, dated between 20 October 2013 and 7 September 2015 * transfer to the Retired Reserve orders, dated 10 September 2015 * email correspondence, dated 9 November and 17 November 2015 * two letters of recommendation, dated 23 November 2015 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Following enlisted service in the U.S. Air Force Reserve and USAR, the applicant was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer of the Army on 14 October 2008, in the rank of second lieutenant, for service in the USAR. She was promoted to first lieutenant (1LT) on 16 August 2011. 2. Military Personnel (MILPER) Message 12-222 (FY13 CPT, Army Reserve Active Guard Reserve (AR AGR), Army Reserve Non-AGR (AR NON-AGR) and Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS), Army Promotion List (APL), Competitive Categories, Promotion Selection Boards (PSB)) was issued on 18 July 2012. a. This MILPER message stipulated the eligibility criteria for consideration for promotion to CPT by the FY13 subject board. It provided that the board would consider eligible lieutenants with a date of rank (DOR): (1) Above the Zone (USAR only): 30 November 2010 and earlier (2) Promotion Zone (USAR only): 1 December 2010 through 31 July 2011 b. Given the applicant's DOR of 16 August 2011, she did not fall within the zone of eligibility for consideration by this board. 3. MILPER Message 13-200 (FY14 CPT, AR-AGR, AR NON-AGR and ARNGUS, APL, Competitive Categories, PSBs) was issued on 29 July 2013. a. This MILPER message stipulated the eligibility criteria for consideration for promotion to CPT by the FY14 subject board. It provided that the board would consider eligible lieutenants with a DOR: (1) Above the Zone (USAR only): 31 July 2011 and earlier (2) Promotion Zone (USAR only): 1 August 2011 through 31 January 2012 b. The applicant was eligible for promotion consideration by this board. c. This MILPER message provided specific guidance on the procedures for reviewing, auditing, and updating personnel records. It also offered guidance for individuals to report to the President of the board "those matters deemed important in the consideration of an officer's record." 4. Case management notes found in the applicant's Soldier Management System (SMS) record, maintained within the HRC Integrated Web Services (IWS) system, show the following entry on 23 September 2013: reminded SM that she needs to IPERM [interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System] her college transcripts 5. The FY14 CPT, AR-AGR, AR-NON AGR and ARNGUS, APL, Competitive Categories, PSB convened on or about 28 October 2013. It appears the applicant was non-selected for promotion by this board; however, the required non-selection for promotion memorandum is not available for review. 6. The applicant provides a letter from A-B University, dated 6 May 2014, which states, in pertinent part, her final period of attendance was summer 1993; the applicant sought to be readmitted to finish her degree but her major had been discontinued. 7. MILPER Message 14-213 (FY15 CPT, AR-AGR, NON-AGR and ARNGUS, APL, Competitive Categories, PSBs) issued on 5 August 2014, announced the zones of consideration for the FY15 CPT, AR-AGR, APL, PSB. * this document stated the requirement for civilian education was a baccalaureate degree * requests for civilian education waivers were to be sent no later than 31 October 2014 8. Case management notes found in the applicant's SMS record, maintained within the HRC IWS system, show the following entry on 8 September 2014: SM does not have college transcript in iPERM. SM is aware that if she does NOT get her transcript iPERM she will be considered 2X PO [pass-over] 9. The applicant provides two education waiver letters, dated 18 September 2014, wherein both she and her commander requested special circumstance consideration for her civilian education. 10. The FY15 CPT, AR-AGR, AR NON-AGR and ARNGUS, APL, Competitive Categories, PSB convened on or about 2 December 2014. It appears the applicant was non-selected for promotion by this board (second non-selection); however, the non-selection for promotion memorandum is not available for review. 11. The applicant's OMPF shows she was awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree on 18 May 2015, from Chatham University, in Integrative Health Studies. 12. Orders issued by Headquarters, USARC on 10 September 2015, reassigned the applicant to the Retired Reserve, effective 1 December 2015, due to promotion non-selection. 13. The applicant provides two letters of recommendation attesting to her work performance, skill, and leadership abilities. 14. An advisory opinion was obtained on 11 July 2017 from the Chief, Officer Promotions Special Actions Branch, HRC. The opinion states: a. A review of the applicant's records indicate that she was not qualified due to not meeting the civilian education requirements set forth by Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers), paragraph 2-9. Her records do not show that she completed a baccalaureate degree. MILPER Message Number 12-222 outlines what actions an officer must do in order to request an education waiver. b. Even if her records had been coded as educationally qualified, there is no guarantee that she would have been selected for promotion to CPT; however, there is definitive proof that officers deemed not educationally qualified are automatically non-selected for Reserve Component promotions. c. The applicant has not provided any documentation to show that she requested an education waiver prior to the convene date of the FY13 CPT, Army Promotion List (APL) Board. 15. The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant to afford her the opportunity to submit comments and/or a rebuttal; however, she did not respond. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 600-8-29 (Officer Promotions) prescribes the officer promotion function of the military personnel system. a. SSBs may be convened under Title 10, U.S. Code, section 628 to consider or reconsider commissioned or warrant officers for promotion when Headquarters, Department of the Army discovers one or more of the following: (1) An officer was not considered from in or above the promotion zone by a regularly scheduled board because of an administrative error. (2) The board that considered an officer from in or above the promotion zone acted contrary to law or made a material error (SSB discretionary). (3) The board that considered an officer from in or above the promotion zone did not have before it some material information (SSB discretionary). b. An officer will not be considered or reconsidered for promotion by an SSB when an administrative error was immaterial, or the officer, in exercising reasonable diligence, could have discovered and corrected the error on the Officer Record Brief (ORB) or in the OMPF. The ORB is a summary document of information generally available elsewhere in the officer’s record. It is the officer’s responsibility to review his or her ORB and OMPF before the board convenes and/or to notify the board, in writing, of possible administrative deficiencies in them. 2. Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers), prescribes the policy and procedures used for selecting and promoting commissioned officers of the USAR. a. Table 2-1 specifies that a 1LT must have a minimum of 2 years, up to a maximum of 5 years, time in grade, for promotion consideration to CPT. b. Paragraph 2-9 (Civilian Education Requirements) provides that effective 1 October 1995, no person may be selected for promotion to the Reserve grade of CPT unless, not later than the day before the selection board convene date, that person has been awarded a baccalaureate degree from an accredited institution recognized by the Secretary of Education or, within the 3 years preceding promotion, the officer has earned a baccalaureate degree from an unaccredited educational institution that has been recognized by the Department of Defense (DoD) for purposes of meeting officer educational requirements. 3. MILPER Messages Number 13-200 and 14-213, issued on 29 July 2013 and 5 August 2014 respectively, announced the zones of consideration for the FY14 and FY15 CPT, AR-AGR, AR NON-AGR and ARNGUS, APL, Competitive Categories, PSBs. These documents provided specific guidance on the procedures for reviewing, auditing, and updating personnel records and stated: a. Army policy requires Soldiers to review their "My Board File" (MBF) on-line. You are to provide any missing documents that you have in your possession or make a reasonable attempt to retrieve those missing documents. Failure to comply with this message may demonstrate a "lack of due diligence" on your part and must be fully explained if you decide to request an SSB at a later date. All documents that are in the performance portion of your OMPF which belong in your MBF will be pulled into your MBF. b. Approximately 60 days before the convene date of the board, all Soldiers in the considered population will be able to review their MBF on-line. c. All officers in the zones of consideration, if desired, may submit correspondence to the President of the board. Individual memoranda should include only those matters deemed important in the consideration of an officer's records. Failure to comply with these instructions will be viewed as a "lack of due diligence" on your part. d. Officers not educationally qualified will not be selected for promotion. e. Failure to comply will be viewed as "a lack of due diligence." DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant requests reinstatement in an active reserve status in the USAR and reconsideration for promotion to the rank of CPT by an SSB under the FY13 criteria. 2. The applicant was promoted to 1LT on 16 August 2011. In accordance with regulatory guidance and MILPER messages, 1LTs must have a minimum of 2 years of time-in-grade prior to being considered for promotion to CPT. The applicant was ineligible for promotion consideration under the FY13 criteria. 3. The applicant was non-selected for promotion by the FY14 and FY15 CPT, AR AGR, AR NON-AGR and ARNGUS, APL, Competitive Categories, PSBs. Accordingly, she was reassigned to the Retired Reserve, effective 1 December 2015, due to promotion non-selection. 4. SSBs are convened to consider commissioned officers for promotion when it is discovered that an officer was not considered for promotion by a regularly scheduled board due to an administrative error, or when the action by a board that considered an officer was contrary to law or involved a material error. In order for an officer to qualify for an SSB, his/her record must show that material error existed at the time that precluded their selection for promotion. 5. The applicant contends her file contained a material error; specifically, she was educationally qualified or should have been granted an education waiver. 6. The applicant contends she obtained a Bachelor of Science degree from A-B University in 1993, prior to her first promotion board review in FY13. However, the evidence shows she was first considered for promotion in calendar year 2013 under the FY14 criteria. Her record is void of a degree or transcripts from A-B University that confirms she obtained a baccalaureate degree prior to her first promotion board. The evidence shows she obtained a degree from Chatham University on 18 May 2015, well after the convene date of both the FY14 and FY15 PSB. 7. The applicant provides two letters to the promotion board president, dated 18 September 2014, which show she requested a waiver of her civilian education requirement. The advisory official notes that, even if her records had been coded as educationally qualified, there is no guarantee that she would have been selected for promotion to CPT; however, there is definitive proof that officers deemed not educationally qualified are automatically non-selected for Reserve Component promotions. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000232 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000232 8 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2