MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 18 December 2001
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001060101

         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst

1

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson
Mr. Jose A. Martinez		Member
Mr. Thomas Lanyi		Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

---

APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his date of rank (DOR) from second lieutenant (2LT) to first lieutenant (1LT) be adjusted from 10 February 1997 to 26 January 1996, and 1LT to captain/CPT adjusted to the 99 year group.

APPLICANT STATES: That his date of rank from 2LT to 1LT should be
adjusted from 10 February 1997 to 26 January 1996, and from 1LT to CPT
should be adjusted to the 99 year group. He also states that after discovering this error, attempts to make this adjustment at the local level were made. He departed the Virgin Islands to pursue his master’s degree in Architecture; however, he could not effectively employ his efforts in making the necessary contacts with the appropriate personnel. In 1999, he was selected for an Army Guard/Reserve (AGR) tour. While on tour assistance was sought, which lead him to this Board. Prior to submitting his packet to the Board, an attempt was made once again at the local level to correct this error. He returned to the Virgin Islands in June 2001, and was able to obtain an endorsement in support of his request. He acquired two additional endorsements which are attached to his request. Based on regulation, he had met all prerequisites for qualification to the grade of 1LT. He further states that he was the commander of the 631st Engineer Detachment, which was also an 0-3 (CPT) position. He concludes by stating that this error occurred during 1995, when the Virgin Islands experienced a devastating hurricane, which interrupted their day-to-day operations. He was also employed as a Facilities Management Specialist on St. Croix. He was located on St Thomas commanding his unit and assisting with the recovery of the island, working with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). In support of his application, he submits several character references supporting his request, several documents from his military personnel files, and several officer evaluation reports (OER).

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show that he had prior enlisted service in the Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands Army National Guard.

He was appointed in the Virgin Islands Army National Guard (VIARNG), Engineer Branch, as a second lieutenant effective 27 January 1994. He was honorably discharged from the VIARNG on 28 December 1995. He was transferred to the
USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).

He was promoted to the rank of 1LT on 10 February 1997.

He was ordered to active duty in the AGR on 12 February 1999.

He was promoted to the rank of CPT on 22 March 2001.



The applicant provided a memorandum which is undated and not signed. This memorandum stated that during the applicant’s tour as commander of the 631st Engineer Detachment in the VIARNG, he executed all tasks with competency, professionalism, and proficiency. As a 2LT, serving in a CPT’s position, he demonstrated the maturity and capabilities required for additional responsibilities. The memorandum further states, in 1995, the applicant’s packet was prepared for submission for the first lieutenant’s promotion board. However, during that year, the Virgin Islands experienced a devastating hurricane, which interrupted the day-to-day operations. The applicant’s packet subsequently did not make it to the appropriate agency for promotion consideration, as they were assisting with the recovery of the Virgin Islands and National Guard’s facilities. The applicant was a key leader, as the engineer commander during this period. He served selflessly, with the commitment which enabled the recovery period to be smooth and expeditious. After the recovery period ended in December 1995, the applicant requested to be transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) for the purpose of pursuing his Master’s degree. He continued to serve in the Army Reserve and completed his Master’s degree. The memorandum concluded by requesting consideration to change the applicant’s DOR.

The applicant also provided a copy of a memorandum from his battalion commander, dated 12 June 2001, which is identical in nature to the previously mentioned unsigned memorandum. Neither individual states that they prepared, signed, or forwarded the request for promotion.

The applicant provided a copy of a memorandum from the Acting Military Personnel Management Officer, dated 25 January 2001. This memorandum stated that the personnel officer had researched his request and found no evidence to support his claim to change his DOR. Records indicate that Federal Recognition Boards (FRB) were held in October and December 1995 and that there was no record of a recommendation from the applicant’s rater to promote him from 2LT to 1LT. The regulation states that an individual must complete
3 years time in grade for promotion from 2LT to 1LT. It also provided that a second or first lieutenant serving in a position for which the authorized TDA grade is captain or higher may be promoted by a FRB after serving creditably for one year. Records show that the applicant served for approximately one year as commander after completing the Officer Basic Course (OBC); however, there was no recommendation to forward his record before the FRB. It further stated that their records did not support the applicant’s draft memo to accompany his request.

The applicant provided another memorandum from the Acting Military Personnel Management Officer, dated 21 February 2001. This memorandum stated that the personnel officer was in receipt of the applicant’s memorandum, dated 7 February 2001.

He stated that an individual could meet the requirements for promotion, but until a recommendation for promotion is received and the record appears before a FRB and is approved by that board, an individual can not be promoted. In the applicant’s case, there was no such recommendation from his rater to promote him. Without a letter of recommendation, this issue was moot. The fact that an
OER says, promote ahead of contemporaries, is not a recommendation for promotion. There were many soldiers from St. Croix, who were placed on Territorial Active Military Service (TAMS) to support the Hurricane Marrilyn recovery efforts. However, the Headquarters in St. Croix continued its normal operations less the soldiers performing TAMS. There were boards held and records considered by at least two FRBs. There was no additional information in this package to show that a letter of recommendation was ever prepared or submitted to a FRB on his behalf and that the Headquarters of the VIARNG was unable to perform its normal operations. Based on the foregoing, he could not support any actions to change the applicant’s DOR.

National Guard Pamphlet 600-3 (Professional Development and Utilization of Commissioned Officers in the Army National Guard) provides guidance for managing Army National Guard (ARNG) officer careers and clarifies new terminology used in the Officer Personnel Management System (OPMS) program. Paragraph 7-3(c) states that to be eligible for promotion to a unit vacancy, an ARNG officer must: be recommended by the unit commander and the State Adjutant General; be in an authorized position which calls for the next higher grade; be in an active ARNG status for at last one year preceding the
date of promotion; have competed 3 years in grade as a second lieutenant; and must have completed the resident officer basic course.

Army Regulation 135-155 prescribes the policies and procedures for promotion of Reserve Component officers. The regulation states that a Reserve Component officer in the grade of W-1 or 2LT will be considered for promotion without review by a selection board. The officer’s records will be screened to determined eligibility for promotion to the next higher grade. This will be determined far enough in advance to permit promotion on the date promotion service is completed. The regulation provides that mandatory selection boards will be convened each year to consider Reserve Component officers in an active status for promotion to first lieutenant through major. The regulation also provides that the effective date of promotion will be the date the mandatory service and promotion eligibility requirements are completed, provided the officer is serving in a duty assignment requiring a higher grade than currently held by the officer. The regulation specifies that in order to be qualified for promotion to





first lieutenant an individual must have completed an officer basic course and
3 years time in grade for promotion to captain, 4 years in grade for mandatory
boards and 6 years of commissioned service. A qualified 2LT will not be promoted before the date of completion of 3 years of promotion service except as an officer serving in a unit vacancy.

Paragraph 2-9b(6) of the same regulation states that lieutenants, if approved by the promotion authority, may be placed on the list of eligibles for promotion. This applies only to those lieutenants who have served creditably for 12 months or more in unit vacancies prescribed for CPT. An officer may not be promoted more than once under this exception.

DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1. There is no evidence of record to shows that a recommendation for promotion was prepared on the applicant and received by a FRB, or approved by the FRB for promotion. FRBs were held in October and December 1995 and there is no evidence to show that a recommendation was submitted on the applicant by his rater to promote him from 2LT to 1LT.

2. The regulation in effect states, that an individual must complete 3 years time in grade for promotion to 1LT and that an individual must serve in a position for which the authorized grade was captain or higher and may be promoted by an FRB after serving creditably for one year.

3. The Board notes that the Acting Personnel Manager stated that an individual could meet the requirements for promotion; however, until a recommendation for promotion is received and the record appears before an FRB, and is approved by that board, the individual would not be promoted. In the applicant’s case, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to show that a recommendation was prepared by the applicant’s rater to recommend him for promotion to the next higher grade.

4. The Board also notes that many soldiers from St. Croix were placed on TAMS to support the Hurricane Marrilyn recovery efforts and that the Headquarters in St. Croix continued its normal operations less the soldiers performing TAMS. There were boards held and records considered by two FRBs. The Board further notes that the Headquarters of the VIARNG was able to continue its normal operations and that a letter of recommendation on the applicant by his rater could have been prepared in a timely manner.



5. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was considered for and promoted to 1LT with a date of rank and effective date of 10 February 1997, and was later promoted to CPT with a DOR and effective date of 22 March 2001. Therefore, there is no basis to adjust his DOR for 1LT and CPT.

6. 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.

7. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________ ________ ________ GRANT

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__iw____ __jm____ __tl____ DENY APPLICATION

                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001060101
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	20011218
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON	Active duty reserve
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 21
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Therefore, there is no basis to adjust his DOR for 1LT and CPT.


Therefore, he is not entitled to adjustment of his DOR for 1LT or CPT.