| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Vic Whitney | Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Lawrence Foster | Member | |
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that the date of his transfer to the Retired Reserve be changed from 1 March to 1 October 2000.
APPLICANT STATES: That his Mandatory Removal Date (MRD) was incorrectly calculated as 7 February 2000, which was 5 years after Senate confirmation of his promotion to the rank of colonel. His MRD should have been calculated as 5 years from the effective date of his promotion to colonel, which was 1 October 1995. He submits copies of Army Regulations, his promotion order, and a 1 June 1995 legal opinion concerning MRD issues in support of his application.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant was serving as an Army Reserve lieutenant colonel in the Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) program with a date of rank of 29 May 1989. He was considered but not selected by the 1993 Colonel, Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB). He was considered and selected for promotion by the 1994 Colonel, RCSB. The Senate confirmed that list of selected officers on 6 February 1995.
The applicant had a Promotion Eligibility Date (PED) of 19 August 1994. He was not immediately promoted due to strength limitations of authorized positions in the controlled grade of colonel. On 1 August 1995, his promotion memorandum to colonel was issued with a date of rank of 19 August 1994 and an effective date of 1 October 1995. Paragraph 3 of the memorandum notes that the applicant was assigned to a position authorized the higher grade effective 1 October 1995.
The legal opinion from the Office of The Judge Advocate General (OTJAG) addressed to the Office, Chief Army Reserve (OCAR) set forth guidance on computation of MRD based on maximum length of service. Paragraph 4 of the opinion provides guidance for AGR officers and notes that officers involuntarily delayed due to strength limitations for promotion to colonel will have their MRD computed under Title 10, U. S. Code, section 3851 (a) as the officer's PED or date of Senate confirmation, whichever is later.
In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was provided by the Army Reserve Personnel Command (AR-PERSCOM). The opinion confirms compliance with OTJAG guidance in the applicant's case, which was computed as 5 years after Senate confirmation of his promotion selection board based on his involuntary delay due to strength limitations in the grade of colonel. The applicant was provided a copy of the opinion for possible comment but failed to respond.
Further clarification of the OTJAG guidance was provided to all appropriate command and agencies in a 30 September 1996 message from the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel (DCSPER). Paragraph 4 of the DCSPER message stated that AGR officers recommended for promotion to colonel on or before 30 September 1996, may serve 5 years time in grade unless their promotion was automatically delayed due to strength limitations in authorized positions or controlled grades.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion, it is concluded:
1. The applicant has not shown error or injustice in the calculation of his MRD based on 5 years of service as a colonel from the date of Senate confirmation of the RCSB that recommended his promotion to colonel. He is not entitled to an adjustment to his MRD as a matter of law.
2. The advisory opinion from OTJAG and AR-PERSCOM confirm that the applicant's MRD was correctly calculated based on the circumstances of this case.
3. 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
__mp___ ___lf__ __tk____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002069585 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030513 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 135.05 |
| 2. | 136.01 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001066258C070421
The opinion also stated that since the applicant met the time in grade (TIG) requirement on 25 June 1999, it is recommended that he be issued a corrected promotion order with a DOR of 25 June 1999, and an effective date of 3 January 2000. Chapter 1405 (Promotions), section 14304 of the ROPMA law, states that officers who are on the Reserve Active Status List (RASL) shall be considered for promotion to the next higher grade by a promotion board convened under section 14101(a), a Reserve...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001732
The applicant states, in his new application, that an officer selected for promotion must: (1) be promoted; (2) transferred to the IRR and be promoted; or (3) retired and promoted per AR 135-155, paragraph 4-18(b). Orders, dated 18 October 1994, retired the applicant from active service effective 31 January 1995 under the provisions of Title 10, U. S. Code, section 3911 and placed him on the Retired List the following day in the rank and grade of LTC, O-5 with 22 years and 8 days of AFS. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013779
On 12 January 2006, he was issued Memorandum, Subject: Eligibility for Promotion as a Reserve Commissioned Officer Not on Active Duty Memorandum that notified him he had been selected for promotion under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-155 to LTC by a board that adjourned on 30 September 2005. On 2 July 2012, he submitted a rebuttal wherein he stated: * The NGB omitted a fact that negates their opinion in that at the time of his selection for promotion to MAJ, he was in an AGR...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091590C070212
The applicant requests, in effect, promotion to captain with a date of rank based on the 1995 Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB). Based on the required 4 years time in grade, his promotion eligibility date (PED) for captain was 14 October 1994. An officer selected by an SSB would be entitled to the same date of rank as if the officer had been recommended for promotion to the grade by the mandatory board that should have considered the officer.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070001463C080213
The applicant requests that his name be submitted to the U. S. Senate for confirmation as a colonel (COL), O-6 effective 1 October 2003; following confirmation, that his records be corrected to indicate that as a result of the National Guard Bureau (NGB) Tour Advisory Review Panel (TARP)/Career Field Review that recommended Army National Guard (ARNG) Active Guard Reserve (AGR) Title 10 officers for assignment and promotion during fiscal year 2004 (FY04) that his name be listed among those...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070001463
The applicant requests that his name be submitted to the U. S. Senate for confirmation as a colonel (COL), O-6 effective 1 October 2003; following confirmation, that his records be corrected to indicate that as a result of the National Guard Bureau (NGB) Tour Advisory Review Panel (TARP)/Career Field Review that recommended Army National Guard (ARNG) Active Guard Reserve (AGR) Title 10 officers for assignment and promotion during fiscal year 2004 (FY04) that his name be listed among those...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070001463
The applicant requests that his name be submitted to the U. S. Senate for confirmation as a colonel (COL), O-6 effective 1 October 2003; following confirmation, that his records be corrected to indicate that as a result of the National Guard Bureau (NGB) Tour Advisory Review Panel (TARP)/Career Field Review that recommended Army National Guard (ARNG) Active Guard Reserve (AGR) Title 10 officers for assignment and promotion during fiscal year 2004 (FY04) that his name be listed among those...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090373C070212
Paragraph (a) states, in pertinent part, that officers shall be placed in the promotion zone and shall be considered for promotion to the next higher grade by a promotion board convened under section 14101(a) of this title, far enough in advance of completing the MYIG so that, if the officer is recommended for promotion, the promotion may be effective on or before the date on which the officer will complete those years of service. Paragraph (b) states, in effect, that a RC officer who is...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001862
The applicant requests, through a court remand, further consideration of his request that his records be corrected to show: " that I be promoted to Colonel effective 5 June 1995 as was required under then and current Army regulations. Orders, dated 18 October 1994, retired the applicant from active service effective 31 January 1995 under the provisions of Title 10, U. S. Code, section 3911 and placed him on the Retired List the following day in the rank and grade of LTC, O-5 with 22 years...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084855C070212
The applicant requests, in effect, that his major (MAJ) date of rank (DOR) be adjusted to 30 June 1994 based on the constructive credit he received upon his appointment in the United States Army Reserve (USAR). The record also confirms that based on the applicant’s constructive service credit his PED to MAJ would have been established as 30 June 1994; however, he remained in training in the STRAP through 30 June 1996, and at the applicant’s request in an application to this Board, action...