IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 April 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080019635 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 that her date of rank and effective date for promotion to the rank of lieutenant colonel (LTC) be changed from 28 October 2008 to 20 August 2008. 2. The applicant states that she is a Reserve Soldier on active duty and the Reserve unit she is assigned to was unaware that the date of assignment determined the date of rank. She goes on to state that the commander signed her AHRC Form 56-R (Promotion Qualification Statement) on 28 October 2008 and that is the date her unit assigned as the date of her assignment on her promotion packet, when in fact it should have been 20 August 2008. 3. The applicant provides what she explains to be a copy of her promotion packet and copies of her orders to active duty and LTC promotion orders. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant was commissioned as a United States Army Reserve first lieutenant in the Army Nurse Corps on 21 May 1992. She continued to serve in a variety of positions and was promoted to the rank of major on 30 April 2002. 2. The applicant was serving on active duty at Fort Eustis, Virginia, when her promotion packet for promotion to the rank of LTC was submitted. She was selected for promotion to the rank of LTC by the 2008 Department of the Army Reserve Components LTC Army Medical Department Selection Board. The Board was approved on 20 August 2008. 3. The Promotion Qualification Statement submitted by the applicant's commander indicates that the applicant was assigned to an LTC position on 28 October 2008. 4. On 30 October 2008, orders were published by the United States Army Human Resources Command in St. Louis (HRC-STL), Missouri, announcing the applicant's promotion to the rank of LTC effective 28 October 2008 with a date of rank (DOR) of 28 October 2008. 5. In the processing of this case a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the HRC-STL Special Actions Branch, Department of the Army Promotions, which opined that documentation was received by that office which verified that she was assigned to a higher graded position on 28 October 2008 and therefore she was promoted with that date as her effective date and DOR. Officials at that office further opined that unless she could provide documentation from the unit verifying that she had been assigned to a higher graded position before 28 October 2008, there was no basis to grant her request. The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment and to date, no response has been received by the staff of the Board. 6. Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) provides, in pertinent part, that a unit officer will have a promotion date and effective date no earlier than the date the board is approved, provided he or she is assigned to a position in a higher grade. When the approval date is before assignment to the higher grade, the effective date and date of promotion will be the assignment date. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contention that she should have been promoted to the rank of LTC on 20 August 2008, the date the promotion board results were approved, has been noted and appears to lack merit. 2. The applicant was only entitled to be promoted to the rank of LTC on 20 August 2008 provided she was occupying an LTC position on that date. She has failed to show through the evidence submitted with her application and the evidence of record that such was the case. 3. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to show that she did in fact occupy a higher graded position prior to 28 October 2008, or that she was unjustly denied or unduly delayed assignment to an LTC position, there appears to be no basis to grant the applicant’s request. 4. In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ 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 that 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. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080019635 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080019635 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1