IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE: 23 August 2023

		DOCKET NUMBER: AR20230001551


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Special Selection Board (SSB) for reconsideration for 
promotion to the rank/grade of lieutenant colonel (LTC)/O-5.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD:

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) Orders Number C-12-639015
*	DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) for Command and 
General Staff Officer Course
*	DA Form 1059-2 (Senior Service and Command and General Staff College 
Academic Evaluation Report) for Intermediate Level Education (ILE) – Advanced 
Operations Course (AOC)
*	Headquarters (HQs), 200th Military Police Command Memorandum, Subject: 
Command Promotion Board Results Fiscal Year 2022 (FY 22) Reserve 
Component LTC
*	DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) Request for SSB
*	Request for SSB
*	FY 22 Reserve Component (RC) LTC Army Promotion List (APL) Active 
Guard/Reserve (AGR) Promotion Selection Board (PSB) board file
*	Civilian Career Brief

FACTS:

1.  The applicant states in effect, on 19 January 2022 the Fiscal Year 2022 RC LTC 
AGR APL PSB convened in accordance with Military Personnel (MILPER) Message 
Number 21-281. He was not selected for promotion in the primary zone though his file 
exceeded the requirements of the board. He has two master's degree, he completed 
both Command and General Staff Officer Course and ILE AOC, there are no derogatory 
documents/statements in his file, his evaluations are good, and he successfully 
completed two Key Designation (KD) assignments. Thus, there was no reason that he 
should not have been selected for promotion to LTC. He believes he was not selected 
for promotion due to the Army's over strength issues and the time he was assigned to 
the Standby Ready Reserve was viewed negatively due to the absence of Officer 
Evaluation Reports (OER) during this period in his career. He requests the Board grant 
him relief for reconsideration for promotion before the SSB.

2.  A review of the applicant's service record shows:

	a.  With prior Regular Army (RA) and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted service, 
the applicant completed his oath of office on 13 June 2003 and was appointed a 
Reserve commissioned officer in the rank of second lieutenant (2LT)/O-1.

	b.  On 8 July 2003, Orders Number C-07-316871, issued by the U.S. Army Reserve 
Personnel Command, the applicant was assigned to the USAR Troop Program Unit 
(TPU), effective 25 June 2003.

	c.  The applicant completed the Adjutant General Officer Basic Course during the 
period of 3 November 2003 through 26 February 2004. DD Form 214 (Certificate of 
Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he completed 3-months and 25-days of 
active service and was awarded the Area of Concentration 42A (AG General).

	d.  Between June 2004 and 21 December 2006, the applicant was ordered to active 
duty in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, reassigned as a, Individual Mobilization 
Augmentee to U.S. Army Europe, ordered to active duty in support of Operation Joint 
Guardian, and assigned to the U.S. Army Reserve Standby Reserve (Active List) due to 
being a key employee

	e.  On 3 May 2010, Orders Number B-05-002260, issued by HRC, the applicant was 
promoted to the rank of captain (CPT)/O-3, effective 29 May 2010.

	f.  On 9 August 2013, Orders Number C-08-311194, issued by HRC, the applicant 
was assigned to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement), effective 9 August 2013 due 
to the basis for assignment to the USAR Control Group (Standby Reserve (Active List) 
no longer existed.

	g.  On 24 February 2015, Orders Number C-02-503078, issued by HRC, the 
applicant was assigned to the USAR TPU, effective 4 February 2015.

	h.  The applicant completed the AG Captains Career Course during the period of 
1 through 12 February 2016.

	i.  On 25 July 2016, Orders Number B-07-603113, issued by HRC, the applicant was 
promoted to the rank of major (MAJ)/O-4- effective 13 June 2016.

	j.  On 27 April 2017, Orders Number R-04-701913, issued by HRC, the applicant 
was ordered to active duty in an AGR status, effective 10 July 2017 for a 3-year active 
duty commitment.

	k.  The applicant completed the Command and General Staff Officer Course (ILE) 
during the period of 7 May 2018 through 16 June 2019.

	l.  The applicant completed the ILE – AOC during the period of 21 September 2020 
through 19 September 2021.

	m.  On 2 July 2023, Orders Number 5249478, issued by the Department of the 
Army, the applicant was promoted to the rank of LTC, effective 1 July 2023 with the 
same date of rank.

3.  The applicant provides:

	a.  U. S. Army HRC Orders Number C-12-639015 which shows the applicant was 
assigned to the USAR Control Group (Standby Reserve (Active List)) due to key 
employee, effective 21 December 2006. The applicant also proved the Assistance 
Secretary of Defense approval letter which authorized his reassignment due to 
employment in key civilian positions.

	b.  HQs, 200th Military Police Command Memorandum, Subject: Command 
Promotion Board Results FY 22 RC LTC which shows the applicant was considered by 
and not selected by the FY22 RC LTC APL PSB. This was the applicant's first pass over 
for promotion as not educationally qualified.

	c.  DA Form 4187 dated 15 June 2022 addressed to HRC, Office of Promotions 
(Reserve Component (RC)) which shows the applicant requested reconsideration for 
promotion to LTC by an SSB. He was notified by his command of the non-select due to 
not being educationally qualified; however, he did meet the military education 
requirement prior to the convening of the PSB. He was later informed by his command 
that they made a mistake and that in fact the PSB did view his record as educationally 
qualified. He also suspects there was an oversight by the board members with 
associating his lack of company grade OERs with a lack of commitment instead of 
relating it to serving in the USAR Control Group (Standby Reserve). 

The applicant's justification for his request was due to an administrative error where the 
PSB non-selection was attributed to critical document(s) not seen by the board 
members and that the board members did not consider his file as educationally 
qualified. He also suspected his time served in the USAR Control Group (Standby 
Reserve) was not taken into consideration for the lack of OERs.

	d.  Memorandum to HRC, Office of Promotions (RC) requesting reconsideration for 
promotion to LTC by an SSB. He was notified by his command of the non-select due to 
not being educationally qualified; however, he did meet the military education 
requirement prior to the convening of the PSB. He was later informed by his command 
that they made a mistake and that in fact the PSB did view his record as educationally 
qualified. He also suspects there was an oversight by the board member with 
associating his lack of company grade OERs with a lack of commitment instead of 
relating it to serving in the USAR Control Group (Standby Reserve). 

He was employed as a Postal Inspector during the period of 2006 through 2015 and 
could not hold a Ready Reserve affiliation as the Federal civilian position was 
emergency essential. As a Federal employee, he was the Lead Postal Inspector for 1st 
Personnel Command in Europe and then relocated to Vicenza, Italy, as a Human 
Resources Specialist and had experience in officer strength management and 
personnel actions. He later became the Lead Human Resources Specialist at a Army 
Medical Center in Texas and led a team of nine Human Resources professionals 
supporting over 1,800 military personnel.

He has completed the military and civilian educational requirements for consideration 
for promotion to LTC plus obtained a second master's degree and completed two KD 
assignments and he was currently serving in the AGR program.

	e.  The screenshot of his board file shows that the applicant viewed and certified his 
file on 14 December 2021. His record contains numerous OERs, service school 
evaluation reports, awards and transcripts. The applicant was non-select for promotion 
on the FY 22 RC LTC APL AGR PSB.

	f.  Civilian Career Brief shows the applicant was employed as:

*	15 August 2010 – Regional Postal Inspector, Vicenza, Italy
*	21 November 2010 – Human Resources Specialist (Military), Vicenza, Italy
*	25 January 2015 – Lead Human Resource Specialist (Military), Fort Sam 
Houston, TX 

The applicant's current civilian position is not coded as emergency essential position or 
key employee.

4.  On 12 June 2023, in the processing of this case, HRC, Team Lead, Officer 
Promotions Special Actions, provided an advisory opinion regarding the applicant's 
request for a reconsideration for promotion to the rank of LTC by an SSB. The advisory 
official stated after review of the applicant's records and provided documentation; his 
request does not have merit. 

In order for the applicant to qualify for a SSB the applicant must show that a material 
error existed within his board file and have supporting documents to show what efforts 
were made prior to the convening date of the promotion board to correct the perceived 
errors. The applicant was fully qualified for both military and civilian education and he 
viewed and certified his board file on 14 December 2021 thus indicating to the board 
member his records were correct and ready for the promotion board. 

The reason for the applicant's non-selection for promotion is unknown due to statutory 
requirements in Title 10 United States Code (USC), section 14104 which prevent the 
disclose of board proceedings to anyone who is not a sworn member of the 
aforementioned board. It can only be concluded that the promotion board determined 
the applicant's overall record, when compared to his peers, did not reflect as high as 
those selected.

5.  On 19 June 2023, the Army Review Boards Agency, Case Management Division 
provided the applicant the advisory opinion for review and comment. He did not 
respond.


BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found 
within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board 
carefully considered the applicant's record of service, documents submitted in support 
of the petition and executed a comprehensive and standard review based on law, policy 
and regulation. Upon review of the applicant’s petition, available military records and 
U.S. Army Human Resources Command- Officer Promotions Special Actions advisory, 
the Board concurred with the advising official finding applicant failed to show that a 
material error existed within his board file and have supporting documents to show what 
efforts were made prior to the convening date of the promotion board to correct the 
perceived errors. The opine noted the applicant was fully qualified for both military and 
civilian education and he viewed and certified his board file on 14 December 2021 thus 
indicating to the board member his records were correct and ready for the promotion 
board.

2.  The Board agreed official promotion and selection boards select members for 
promotion based upon their performance and potential; the Board does not.  The Board 
may refer records to appear before a special selection board (SSB) for promotion 
consideration when there is a clear error or injustice.  The Board agreed the request for 
relief has no merit as the available evidence does not clearly indicate that the conditions 
for referring the applicant for reconsideration was met. The Board found insufficient 
evidence that would merit the applicant being reconsidered for promotion to lieutenant 
colonel. Furthermore, evidence in the record shows the applicant was promoted to the 
rank of LTC, effective 1 July 2023. Therefore, the Board concluded there was no action 
required by the Board based on the applicant being already promoted to LTC. Relief 
was denied. 


BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:X	:X	:X	DENY APPLICATION


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.


	 
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.


ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): N/A.


?
REFERENCES:

1.  Army Regulation (AR) 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant 
Officers Other Than General Officers) in effect at the time, prescribes policy and 
procedures used for selecting and promoting commissioned officers (other than 
commissioned warrant officers) of the Army National Guard of the United States 
(ARNGUS) and of commissioned and warrant officers (WO) of the U.S. Army Reserve 
(USAR).
   a.  Paragraph 2-5 (Eligibility for consideration), to be eligible for consideration for 
promotion to the next higher grade, an ARNGUS or USAR officer must have 
continuously performed service on either the Reserve Active Status List (RAL) or the 
Active Duty List (or a combination of both lists) during the 1-year period ending on the 
convening date of the promotion board and must meet the Time in Grade (TIG) 
requirements in tables 2-1 or 2-3, as appropriate. 
   b.  Paragraph 2-7 (Selection criteria), to be eligible for selection, an ARNGUS or 
USAR officer who meets the eligibility requirements must be properly in an active status 
and participating satisfactorily in Reserve training. For promotion purposes, an officer is 
deemed to be a satisfactory participant and in full compliance with the commander's 
instructions if, within the 12-months before the convene date of the board, the officer 
has not been reassigned, transferred, or separated as an unsatisfactory participant 
under AR 135-91. In addition, the officer must not be being processed for such action 
on the selection board convene date.
   c.  Paragraph 2-8 (Military educational requirements), to qualify for selection, 
commissioned officers (other than commissioned warrant officers) must complete the 
military educational requirements in table 2-2 not later than the day before the selection 
board convene date. The officer must also be enrolled and participating satisfactorily at 
the time of consideration. Officers enrolled in an authorized resident command and staff 
college course at the time they are considered for promotion to LTC will be granted 
equivalent credit for having completed 50 percent of the Command and General Staff 
Officers Course (CGSOC).
   d.  Paragraph 2-10, a. mandatory selection boards will convene each year (chap 3). 
These boards will consider ARNGUS and USAR officers on the RASL for promotion to 
CPT through LTC. b. First consideration. First consideration for promotion will occur well 
in advance of the date the officer will complete the TIG requirements in tables 2-1 or 2-
3, as appropriate. c. Subsequent consideration. Those officers noted in b, above, who 
were not selected for promotion on the first consideration, and who remain in an active 
status, will be reconsidered by the next board considering their grade and/or branch. d. 
Below the zone consideration. The SA may, when the needs of the Army require, 
authorize the consideration of officers for promotion to the next higher grade from below 
the promotion zone.
Table 2–1
Time in grade requirements commissioned officers, other than commissioned warrant officers

From        To
Minimum Years 
in lower grade
Maximum Years 
in lower grade
O1
(2LT)
O2
(1LT)
2
42 months
O2
(1LT)
O3
(CPT)
2
5
O3
(CPT)
O4
(MAJ)
4
7
O4
(MAJ)
O5
(LTC)
4
7
O5
(LTC)
O6
(COL)
3
(See note below.)
Notes:
Announced annually. Normal time in grade is 5 years, subject to the needs of the Army.

Table 2–2
 
Military educational requirements commissioned officers, other than commissioned warrant officers grade
   
   e.  Paragraph 3–14 (Method of selection), the selection board will base their 
recommendations for promotion on impartial consideration of all personnel being 
considered. The board will use a method of selection as prescribed below. (Fully 
qualified) - To be fully qualified for selection, an officer must be:
*	eligible for consideration
*	participating satisfactorily
*	qualified physically, morally, and professionally
*	capable of performing the duties of the next higher grade under mobilization 
conditions
*	educationally qualified
(Best qualified) - To select those who are best qualified, the board must first determine 
which members of a group are fully qualified. The best qualified are then selected from 
that group. 
	f.  Paragraph 3-19, a. Officers and warrant officers who have either failed of 
selection for promotion, or who were erroneously not considered for promotion through 
administrative error may be reconsidered for promotion by either a promotion advisory 
board or an SSB, as appropriate. SSBs, convened under the Reserve Officer Personnel 
Management Act (ROPMA) on and after 1 October 1996, will reconsider commissioned 
officers, (other than commissioned warrant officers) who were wrongly not considered 
and reconsider commissioned officers (other than commissioned warrant officers) who 
were considered but not selected by mandatory promotion boards that convened on or 
after 1 October 1996. These boards do not reconsider officers who were not considered 
or not selected by mandatory promotion boards that convened before 1 October 1996. 
These boards are convened to correct/ prevent an injustice to an officer or former officer 
who was eligible for promotion but whose records: Through error, were not submitted to 
a mandatory promotion selection board for consideration and/or contained a material 
error when reviewed by the mandatory selection board. Records of officers or former 
officers will be referred for SSB action when the Office of Promotions (RC) determines 
the following: (1) An officer was eligible for promotion consideration; however, the 
officer's records were, through error, not submitted to a mandatory promotion selection 
board. (2) A review of a mandatory selection board finds that an officer's records 
contained a material error. (3) The Army Board for Correction of Military Records 
(ABCMR) requests such a referral. First it must be determined that there is a fair risk 
that one or more of the following circumstances was responsible:
*	the record erroneously reflected that an officer was ineligible for selection for 
educational or other reasons, in fact, the officer was eligible for selection when 
the records were submitted to the original board for consideration
*	one or more of the evaluation reports seen by the board were later deleted from 
an officer's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF)
*	one or more of the evaluation reports that should have been seen by a board 
were missing from an officer's OMPF
*	one or more existing evaluation reports as seen by the board in an officer's 
OMPF were later modified
*	another person's adverse document had been filed in an officer's OMPF and was 
seen by the board
*	an adverse document, required to be removed from an officer's OMPF as of the 
convening date of the board, was seen by the board
*	The Silver Star or higher award was missing from an officer's OMPF
*	an officer's military or civilian educational level, including board certification level 
for AMEDD officers, as constituted in the officer's record was incorrect
2.  Title 10, USC, section 628 (Special Selection Boards), (a) Persons Not Considered 
by Promotion Boards Due to Administrative Error. (1) If the Secretary of the military 
department concerned determines that because of administrative error a person who 
should have been considered for selection for promotion from in or above the promotion 
zone by a promotion board was not so considered, the Secretary shall convene a SSB 
under this subsection to determine whether that person should be recommended for 
promotion. (b) Persons Considered by Promotion Boards in Unfair Manner. (1) If the 
Secretary of the military department concerned determines, in the case of a person who 
was considered for selection for promotion by a promotion board but was not selected, 
that there was material unfairness with respect to that person, the Secretary may 
convene a SSB under this subsection to determine whether that person (whether or not 
then on active duty) should be recommended for promotion. 

3.  Title 10, USC, section 14104 states, the proceedings of a selection board convened 
under section 14101 or 14502 of this title may not be disclosed to any person not a 
member of the board, except as authorized or required to process the report of the 
board. This prohibition is a statutory exemption from disclosure, as described in section 
552(b) (3) of title 5. (b) Prohibited Uses of Board Discussions, Deliberations, Notes, and 
Records.—The discussions and deliberations of a selection board described in 
subsection (a) and any written or documentary record of such discussions and 
deliberations—(1) are immune from legal process; (2) may not be admitted as evidence; 
and (3) may not be used for any purpose in any action, suit, or judicial or administrative 
proceeding without the consent of the Secretary of the military department concerned. 

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	AR20230001551


1
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1