RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 20 April 2004
DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003088499
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.
| |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | |Director |
| |Mr. G. E. Vandenberg | |Analyst |
The following members, a quorum, were present:
| |Mr. Thomas D. Howard, Jr. | |Chairperson |
| |Ms. Jennifer L. Prater | |Member |
| |Mr. Lawrence Foster | |Member |
The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.
The Board considered the following evidence:
Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.
Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that he be granted retroactive pay and
allowances for the period 17 March 2000 through 21 January 2001.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that the prior decision of the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (herein referred to as the Board)
did not explain why retroactive pay and allowances were not paid him based
on the Board’s favorable granting of an earlier effective date of rank.
3. The applicant provides no additional supporting documentation.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were
summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the
Board in Docket Number AR2001055129, on 20 December 2001.
2. The applicant’s request for an explanation as to why he has not
received retroactive pay and allowances is a continuation or elaboration of
his earlier request; therefore, is considered a request for a
reconsideration of his earlier application.
3. The previous Board determined that the applicant was entitled to
adjustment of his date of rank for chief warrant officer four (CW4) to 17
March 2000, the date he was assigned to the higher-grade position.
4. Title 10, United States Code, section 14308(c)(2)in pertinent part,
states that a Reserve officer is not entitled to additional pay and
allowances if the effective date of the officer’s promotion is adjusted to
reflect a date earlier than the actual date of the officer’s promotion.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. Although the prior decision did not cite the specific law precluding
the granting of retroactive pay and allowances, Findings number 8 states:
“Current promotion policy specifies that antedating of either the effective
date of promotion or promotion eligibility date will not entitle a Reserve
warrant officer to increased pay and allowances.”
2. Further, Conclusions number 5 infers this as it states, “The Board
further notes that any correction to the applicant’s promotion eligibility
date does not entitle him, as a CW4, to increased pay and allowances.”
3. While the prior decision may have been unclear it does not contain an
error or create an injustice.
4. Therefore, the applicant should be notified that the law precludes the
requested benefit and that his application must be denied.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__TDH__ __LF ___ ___JLP __ 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.
__Thomas D. Howard, Jr.___
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR2003088499 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON | |
|DATE BOARDED |20040420 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
|DISCHARGE REASON | |
|BOARD DECISION | |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
|ISSUES 1. |128 |
|2. | |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055129C070420
The applicant’s military records were not provided to the Board. The Board agrees with the National Guard Bureau that the applicant has not provided substantive evidence to support his contention that he was not promoted in a timely manner due to several administrative errors. Notwithstanding the opinion from the National Guard Bureau, the Board notes that the applicant did not request correction to his date of rank to 1 October 1998, his time in grade date; therefore, his command will not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087548C070212
The applicant was not considered and selected for promotion to CW4 until the 2002 board convened. Documentation in his records shows that he completed a physical examination effective 3 January 2001 and his FLAG was favorably removed effective 12 January 2001; therefore, his promotion effective and date of rank for CW4 should be the approval date of the 2002 RCSB. The Board concludes that the 2002 CW4 promotion board considered and selected the individual and he should have been promoted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015976
He requested and received a correction to his military records and in September 2003 was promoted to CW3 with a date of rank of 8 March 1998. When he was not promoted to CW4 on 8 March 2004, he inquired and was told that he needed to complete the WOSC to be eligible for promotion consideration. However, the NGB denied his request and so informed the applicant that he was required to complete this course of study prior to being promoted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001051136C070420
The applicant was considered by the next available Reserve CW3 Promotion Board, the FY94 promotion board, but was not selected for promotion. The effective date for the applicant’s promotion to CW3 from the FY95 board His present promotion memorandum to CW4, dated 1 August 2000, should be corrected to be dated 19 May 2000, the adjournment date of the promotion board and therefore the effective date for promotion to CW4 and the date from which CW4 pay and allowances should be paid.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081327C070215
APPLICANT STATES : That she was a Reserve officer serving on an Extended Active Duty (EAD) tour at the time she was selected for promotion to major. She was promoted to major with a promotion effective date and date of rank of 17 November 2002, the date she assumed her AGR major’s position. However, at the time she was selected for promotion to major, she was serving on an EAD tour in a lower graded authorized position.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001053717C070420
the effective dates granted to those earlier cases. 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: Approval of the applicant’s request for an adjustment of his effective date of promotion, and back pay based on actions taken in other similar cases, is not appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057641C070420
ROPMA also specifies that the officer’s effective date of promotion will be the Presidential approval date of the board which selected the officer. 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: The effective date of promotion for those officers remained the date the President actually approved the board and as shown on their promotion memorandums.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077400C070215
The applicant also stated that he has not cashed the correction paycheck pending this consideration. As in this case, the applicant has submitted evidence showing he was assigned to a captain position on 15 October 1997. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by amending the Board’s recommendation appearing in the proceedings, dated 5 February 2002 ABCMR List Case (ROPMA Project) – Phase IV (Yellow) by showing that the individual concerned was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011323C070205
On 18 July 2006, the Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, the HRC, St. Louis, Missouri, issued Orders Number B-07-605213, promoting the applicant to CW4 with a promotion effective date of 18 July 2006 and date of rank of 6 July 2006. Accordingly, a promotion order was issued with a promotion effective date of 18 July 2006 and a date of rank of 6 July 2006. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073057C070403
However, in this case, the applicant could not be selected based on the fact his 2000 record did not reflect completion of the required military education requirements (WOAC) by the convene date of the board. The applicant submitted an Application for Correction of Military Records (DD Form 149) requesting a STAB due to a Code 11, OER missing from his 2001 file. However, pertinent regulations do not specify that an OER Code 11, Promotion Report is required for subsequent promotion...