SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:         

	BOARD DATE:               13 September 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:      AR2001056861

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  A quorum was present during the further consideration and deliberation.  The findings appearing in proceedings dated 1 March 2001 were affirmed.  The following additional findings, conclusions, and recommendation were adopted by the Board.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Stephanie Thompkins		Analyst	

	The Board convened at the call of the Director on the above date to reconsider the conclusions and recommendation appearing in proceedings dated 1 March 2001.

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. John E. Denning		Member	
	Mr. Terry L. Placek		Member	

	The applicant and counsel, if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following additional evidence:

	Exhibit A – 2nd Endorsement, US Army Review Board Agency Support Division, SFMR-RBR-SL, Subject:  ABCMR Proceedings – Petosa, John A., 125-52-3928, dated 1 March 2001.

	Exhibit B – Orders 84-5, Department of the Army, Headquarters, Fort Detrick, Maryland, dated 23 March 1999.

THE BOARD ADDITIONALLY FINDS:

14.  The applicant requested adjustment to his date of rank for major.  The Board’s previous recommendation in this case (AR2000049566) was for promotion consideration for major by a special selection board (SSB) under 1998 and 1999 criteria based on erroneous non-consideration. The Board concluded that based on the applicant’s date of rank for captain of 1 March 1992, his maximum years of service in grade date for major was 28 February 1999, and the applicant was not given fair and timely promotion consideration in 1998 and 1999 by the Reserve Components Selection Boards (RCSB’s).  The recommendation was approved on 12 March 2001.

15.  On 2 May 2001, an official of the Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) advised the Board in writing of the return of this case to the Board without corrective action and provided a copy of Orders Number 84-5 issued on 25 March 1999.  The orders show the applicant was released from active duty and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) effective 1 August 1999.  Therefore, he is not eligible for promotion consideration to major by an RCSB under 1998 and 1999 criteria, and he is not entitled to an adjustment of his date of rank.

16.  The orders releasing the applicant from active duty effective 1 August 1999 were not available to the Board.

17.  The applicant did not complete his application by showing the date of his discharge or release from active duty.

18.  On 16 August 2001, an official of the active duty promotion branch, PERSCOM advised the Board that the applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to major by the 1998 and 1999 active duty promotion boards for Judge Advocate General’s Corps officers.

19.  The foregoing evidence was not previously made available to this Board. 

20.  Pertinent promotion regulations and policies specify that officers on the active duty list will be considered by the active duty promotion boards only, and that officers in the Reserve/National Guard in an active Reserve status, not on the active duty list, will only be considered for promotion by the RCSB’s.

THE BOARD ADDITIONALLY CONCLUDES: 

5.  At the time of the Board’s 1 March 2001 decision in this case, the orders releasing the applicant from active duty were not made available to the Board for consideration.  The Board was unaware of his active duty service and that he was considered and not selected in 1998 and 1999 by the active duty promotion boards.
6.  Officers on the active duty list are not eligible for consideration by RCSB’s.

7.  In view of the additional factors in this case the applicant is not eligible for promotion consideration by the 1998 or 1999 RCSB for promotion to major since he was on active duty until 1 August 1999, during those boards.  The earliest RCSB he was eligible for was the 2000 RCSB, which recommended him for promotion to major.

8.  The Board concludes that the applicant does not have a basis for adjustment to his DOR for major as he was on active duty and not in an active Reserve status on his maximum years of service in grade date of 28 February 1999, and he was not selected by the previous 1998 and 1999 active duty boards.  He was properly considered by the 2000 RCSB and given a promotion date of 19 July 2000, the date the President approved the board.

9.  The Board further notes that the applicant was considered and not selected while on active duty for promotion to major in 1998 and 1999 by the active duty board based on meeting maximum time in service.

10.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to rescind the Board’s previous recommendation.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by rescinding the Board’s recommendation appearing in the proceedings dated 1 March 2001 and to show that the individual’s request for an adjusted DOR for major was denied.

BOARD VOTE:

_fne____  _tlp____  __jed___      GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

					           Fred N. Eichorn
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001056861	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010913	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.01	
2.	131.05	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.