IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160018078 BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ___x____ ___x____ ___x____ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160018078 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by submitting the applicant's record to Headquarters, Department of the Army G-3/5/7, for a final determination pertaining to his eligibility for Advanced Operations Course constructive credit. 2. The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to any relief without the benefit of the process described above. _____________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: 23 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160018078 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 constructive credit for the Command and General Staff Course (CGSOC) Advanced Operations Course (AOC). 2. The applicant states: a. He should have received constructive credit for the AOC during one of the two constructive credit boards conducted by the Department of the Army in fiscal year 2013 (FY13). He met or exceeded all the necessary key developmental assignment requirements to receive constructive credit, but due to no fault of his own, his packet was not submitted to the Arkansas Army National Guard (ARARNG) Officer Personnel Management (OPM) section for follow-on submission. b. He was a major (MAJ) in the Joint Forces Headquarters (JFHQ) of the Arkansas National Guard during May 2013, and was a member of the 142nd Field Artillery Brigade (FAB) of the ARARNG during August 2013. The ARARNG OPM section investigation determined that since he was leaving the JFHQ during the first board request and was newly assigned to the 142nd FAB during the second board request, he was mistakenly overlooked; therefore, a packet for constructive credit was never prepared nor submitted by the ARARNG reporting authority. 3. The applicant provides: * memorandum from Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel (DCSPER), ARARNG, dated 25 August 2015, subject: Request for AOC Constructive Credit for [applicant] * memorandum from the Office of the Adjutant General, Military Department of Arkansas, dated 28 August 2015, subject: Request for CGSOC AOC Constructive Credit as an Exception to Policy for [applicant] * memorandum from the National Guard Bureau (NGB), dated 15 May 2013, subject: Request for Review of Officer Assignment History for ARNG Consolidated Constructive Credit for AOC * three Officer Record Briefs (ORB) * DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 9 January 2009 * DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 21 February 2014 * eight Officer Evaluation Reports (OER) * Orders 212-826, issued by the Military Department of Arkansas on 31 July 2013 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Following enlisted service in the U.S. Air Force and the ARNG, the applicant was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer of the Army, for service in the ARARNG, in the rank of second lieutenant in the Ordnance (OD) branch. 2. The applicant was promoted to MAJ on 20 March 2007. 3. The applicant served in Kuwait/Iraq from 15 March to 18 December 2008. 4. The applicant completed the U.S. Army CGSOC Intermediate Level Education Common Core on 9 January 2009. 5. The applicant was promoted to lieutenant colonel (LTC) on 6 April 2012. 6. On 25 August 2015, the ARARNG, DCSPER, provided a memorandum addressed to the Board requesting AOC constructive credit for the applicant. The memorandum states: a. The applicant should have received AOC constructive credit during one of the two Constructive Credit Boards by the Department of the Army in FY13. He had all the necessary key developmental assignments to receive credit but due to no fault of his own, his packet was not submitted to the ARARNG G-1 OPM section for follow-on submission. b. The ARARNG OPM section requested packets from all ARARNG major subordinate commands (MSC)/tables of distribution and allowances (TDA) on qualified candidates for the AOC constructive credit. This request was made in early May 2013. There were approximately 7 days for the units to determine eligibility, complete packets, and send the packets to the OPM. These packets were sent to the NGB on 15 May by the OPM. The ARARNG OPM section immediately sent a message to all ARARNG units to determine eligible officers, complete packets, and submit to OPM. These packets were submitted to NGB on 30 August 2013. c. The applicant was a MAJ in the JFHQ Detachment of the ARARNG during May 2013 and was a member of the 142nd FAB of the ARARNG during August 2013. It is the opinion of the OPM section that since the applicant was leaving JFHQ during the first board request and was new to the 142nd FAB during the second board request, he was simply overlooked by his units for this constructive credit submission. 7. The Office of the Adjutant General, Military Department of Arkansas, provided a memorandum on 28 August 2015, requesting AOC constructive credit for the applicant. The memorandum states: a. The applicant's personnel records were screened and he met the following criteria for constructive credit. (1) Served successfully in a MAJ or higher level key developmental position for a minimum of 24 months (cumulative) as of 1 February 2013. (2) Served at least 12 months (consecutive) in a MAJ or higher level key developmental position which includes at least 6 months served in a deployed combat environment. b. The State verified that he was not flagged for Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) failure, weight control, or other adverse action. 8. An advisory opinion was obtained from the NGB, Personnel Policy Division during the processing of this case. The NGB recommends partial approval of the applicant's request and stated: a. The Soldier contends he met the requirements to receive AOC constructive credit. The Soldier requests his ORB be updated to reflect the earned credit prior to the convening date of the FY13 Constructive Credit Board. b. The Soldier submitted a memorandum from the ARARNG dated 25 August 2015. The ARARNG OPM requested packets through all ARARNG units who had qualified candidates for AOC constructive credit in May and August of 2013. In both instances, the Soldier's unit failed to submit his packet despite the Soldier meeting all the criteria outlined in the NGB memorandum dated 15 May 2013, subject: Request for Review of Officer Assignment History for ARNG Consolidated Constructive Credit for AOC. Further, the ARARNG believes the Soldier should have been allowed consideration by the AOC Constructive Credit Boards during one of the two boards conducted by the Army in FY13. Due to no fault of his own, the Soldier was not considered for the two FY13 AOC Constructive Credit Boards. c. The ARARNG concurs with their recommendation. 9. The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant to give him the opportunity to submit comments or a rebuttal. He responded and expressed his concurrence with the advisory opinion. REFERENCES: The NGB issued a memorandum on 15 May 2013, which provided guidance to all States and Territories regarding a review of officer assignment history of ARNG consolidated constructive credit for AOC. The memorandum states: a. On 19 September 2012, the Director of Training, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3/5/7, granted constructive credit for AOC to active component officers based on the officer's successful completion of a key developmental assignment. The ARNG is pursuing a similar constructive credit request for eligible ARNG officers and requests the State/Territory's assistance in compiling a list of officers who meet the criteria outlined below. b. A key developmental assignment is one that is deemed fundamental to the development of an officer in his or her core branch or functional area competencies or deemed critical by the senior Army leadership to provide experience across the Army's strategic mission. The majority of these positions fall within the scope of the officer's branch or functional area mission. Key developmental positions include, but are not limited to, those positions that are listed as such in DA Pamphlet 600-3 (Commissioned Officers Professional Development and Career Management). Due to the unique structure and mission of the ARNG, not all of the assignments that could be considered as key developmental are accounted for in DA Pamphlet 600-3. c. The ARNG will submit the constructive credit request for officers who have not completed an AOC credentialing course in the grades of O-4 or O-5 who were commissioned between 1994-2003 and have either served successfully in a field grade key developmental position at battalion, brigade, or higher level for 24 months (cumulative) or served successfully in a field grade key developmental position at battalion, brigade, or higher level for 12 months (consecutive) which includes at least 6 months served in a deployed combat environment. d. States/Territories must submit The Adjutant General request memo, roster of the officers in their State/Territory that meet the criteria outlined above, and OERs for the timeframes outlined. e. The Officer Policy Branch will receive the State/Territory requests, verify eligibility (in conjunction with ARNG-Training Branch), consolidate and compile the request, submit the request to ARNG-Training, and publish guidance on the final disposition of the request. ARNG Training will staff the consolidated request for the Department of the Army (DA), ARNG's signature and forward to Headquarters, DA (HQDA) G-3/5/7 for final determination. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends he should be granted constructive credit based on his completion of the CGSOC AOC. He contends that he met or exceeded the necessary key developmental assignment requirements but his request for constructive credit consideration under the FY 13 criteria was not submitted to the proper officials due to no fault of his own. 2. The ARARNG DCSPER reviewed the applicant's records and determined he was eligible for constructive credit consideration in FY13. The ARARNG DCSPER also confirmed his record was never submitted for consideration by the Constructive Credit Board, due to no fault of his own. 3. The Arkansas Adjutant General also confirmed the applicant successfully performed the required key developmental assignments, including deployment in a combat environment, and he was not flagged for APFT failure, weight control, or other adverse action. The NGB fully supports the consideration of the applicant's record by the Constructive Service Board under the FY13 criteria. 4. The evidence supports a recommendation to direct review of the applicant's record by HQDA G-3/5/7 for a final determination. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160018078 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160018078 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2