RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:                 19 OCTOBER 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:         AR20040008486


      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             |
|     |Ms. Deyon D. Battle               |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Barbara Ellis                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Hubert Fry                    |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Robert Rogers                 |     |Member               |

      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 her effective date of rank (DOR) for promotion
to major (O-4) be adjusted to 25 June 2003.

2.  The applicant states her promotion to major was involuntarily delayed
through no fault of her own.  She states while she was a member of the
330th Combat Support Hospital (CSH) in June 2003, she was mobilized and
ultimately attached to the 946th Forward Surgical Team.  She goes on to
state somewhere around that period of time, the promotion list results were
released and she was selected for promotion to major.  She states,
according to her Personnel Qualification Record, her duty position was
66HOO with an authorized grade of O-4.  She states she was sitting in a
promotable slot, but was not promoted at that time and when she inquired
about her promotion she was told due to her mobilization, she was no longer
assigned to the 330th CSH; she was ineligible for promotion because her
security clearance had expired; she was ineligible because her physical had
expired; and she was ineligible because she was no longer slotted for a 66F
position. She states that she was mobilized as a 66F with a current Army
Physical Fitness Test and that she had put in a request for a current
security clearance.

3.  The applicant continues by stating if any of her requirements for
promotion expired before or during her mobilization, it did not stop her
from being shipped to Afghanistan.  She states any issue regarding her
security clearance should have been addressed and resolved during the
soldier readiness process.  She states, in effect, as a result of
unfortunate incidents, her promotion has been involuntarily delayed for
approximately 9 months and that reaching the rank of major is the highlight
of her 20-year service.  She concludes by stating she does not want her
service career marred by this injustice and unjustifiable delay in her
promotion and that she is grateful to have served her country as a
noncommissioned officer and a commissioned officer in the United States
Army Reserve (USAR).

4.  The applicant provides in support of her application copies of
documents that are maintained in her Official Military Personnel File.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  On 13 March 1984, she enlisted in the USAR for 6 years in the pay grade
of E-1.  She remained a member of the enlisted ranks until she accepted an
appointment as a second lieutenant (O-1) in the USAR, which became
effective on her acceptance date, 11 March 1991.
2.  She was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant (O-2) on 10 March
1994; and to the rank of Captain (O-3) on 1 April 1997.

3.  The applicant was considered and selected for promotion to major by the
2003 Reserve Component Selection Board (RCSB), which convened from
3 February 2003 until 4 March 2003.  The President approved the board
results on 20 May 2003.

4.  On 20 June 2003, orders were published ordering her to active duty with
an effective date of 29 June 2003, for the purpose of mobilization for
Operation Enduring Freedom.  The RCSB promotion list was released on 24
June 2003; however, she was not promoted until 31 March 2004, due to the
lack of an updated national agency check (NAC).

5.  A Request for Security Determination (DA Form 3247-R) was initiated on
the applicant on 18 July 2003.  It should be noted the DA Form 3247-R shows
a local files check was completed on her and information contained in her
personnel records, medical records, military police records and local
intelligence files were favorable.

6.  On 18 July 2003, orders were published assigning her to the 946th
Forward Surgical Team, Fort Benning, Georgia, with duty at Bagram,
Afghanistan, in support of Operation Enduring Freedom.

7.  On 28 March 2005, during the processing of this case, an Advisory
Opinion was obtained from the Deputy Chief of Staff (DCS), G-1 at
Headquarters, United States Army Reserve Command, Fort McPherson, Georgia,
who opined the applicant’s request for adjustment of her DOR to 25 June
2003, is justified.  The DCS, G-1 stated the applicant was promoted by the
United States Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri, based on
the date of her security clearance and Army nurses are not required to have
security clearances, but rather a favorable NAC.  In the Advisory Opinion,
the DCS stated all other criteria appear to have been met on the board
approval date and the United States Army Reserve Command, St. Louis, as the
issuing authority for her promotion memorandum, must make any corrections
to her DOR.

8.  On 29 March 2005, a copy of the Advisory Opinion was forwarded to the
applicant for her information and concurrence.  She concurred with the
Advisory Opinion on 1 April 2005.


9.  Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant
Officers other than General Officers) prescribes policy and procedures used
in the selection and promotion of commissioned officers of the Army
National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) and the commissioned and
warrant officers of the USAR.  Table 2-1 of this regulation outlines the
service requirements for promotion and indicates the minimum years required
in the lower grade for promotion to major is 4 years and the maximum years
in grade (MYIG) for promotion to major is 7 years.

10.  Chapter 4, section III (Dates of Promotion) of the regulation provides
the procedures for computing promotion effective dates of all Reserve
Component (RC) officers.  Chapter 4-18(d) states, in pertinent part, for
commissioned officers (other than commissioned warrant officers), the DOR
and effective date of promotion following an involuntary delay may be
earlier than the date of the promotion memorandum.  However, it cannot be
earlier than the approval date of the board that selected the officer.

11.  Chapter 4-17 of the regulation establishes the PED and DOR are the
date the officer meets the eligibility criteria for promotion to the next
higher grade. In addition, it indicates an officer’s PED will become
his/her DOR upon promotion and this date will be used to establish the
relative seniority for officer’s holding the same rank.

12.  Title 10 of the United States Code, section 14304 (10 USC 14304)
provides the legal authority for eligibility for consideration for
promotion based on MYIG provisions of the law.  Paragraph (a) states, in
pertinent part, 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.  If the officer occupies a position
equal to or higher than the grade to which they are being promoted, they
may be promoted before they reach their MYIG.  This provision of the law
establishes the MYIG for captain going to major as 7 years.

13.  Paragraph (b) of 10 USC 14304 states an officer who is recommended for
promotion to the next higher grade by a selection board the first time the
officer is considered for promotion and who is placed on an approved
promotion list shall (if not promoted sooner or removed from that list by
the President or by reason of declination) be promoted, without regard to
the existence of a vacancy, on the date on which the officer completes the
MYIG specified in this law.

14.  Title 10 USC 14311(b) provides when the appointment of an officer to a
higher grade is delayed for lack of qualifications and the Secretary
concerned later determines the officer is qualified for promotion to the
higher grade, the officer shall be retained on the promotion list.  This
section further provides the officer shall, upon promotion to the higher
grade, have the same date of rank, the same effective date for pay and
allowances of that grade, and the same position on the Reserve-Active-
Status List (RASL) as the officer would have had if no delay had
intervened, unless the Secretary concerned determines the officer was
unqualified for promotion for any part of the delay.  Finally, this section
explains if the Secretary makes such a determination, the Secretary may
adjust such date of rank, effective date of pay and allowances, and
position on the RASL as the Secretary considers appropriate under the
circumstances.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was promoted by the United States Army Human Resources
Command, St. Louis, based on the completion date of her security clearance.

2.  Notwithstanding the delay in the update of her NAC, she met all of the
eligibility criteria for promotion to the rank of major on the day the RCSB
convened.  The applicant has been a member of the Reserve since March 1984
and it is reasonable to presume had she been timely notified prior to the
expiration of her NAC that it needed to be updated, she would have done so
as she did once she was notified.  Therefore, this Board finds it would be
in the interest of justice to adjust her DOR.

3.  Consideration has been given to the Advisory Opinion obtained in this
case.  However, the applicant was selected for promotion by the RCSB
convened on 3 February 2003 and adjourned on 4 March 2003.  The President
approved the report of the selection board on 20 May 2003.  The promotion
list was released on 24 June 2003.  In accordance with the applicable law,
her DOR and effective date of promotion, following the involuntary delay,
may be earlier than the date of the promotion memorandum.  However, it
cannot be earlier than the approval date of the board that selected the
officer.  This Board has determined her DOR should be changed to the date
the President approved the report of the selection board.

4.  Pursuant to the Board’s findings that an equitable basis exists to
support adjusting the applicant’s DOR, she is entitled to a change in the
effective date of her promotion and to additional pay and allowances based
upon her adjusted date of rank.

5.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected
as recommended below.

BOARD VOTE:

___BE __  ___HF __  __RR ___  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all
Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by
showing that her DOR and her effective date of promotion to major is 20 May
2003, and that she receive additional pay and allowances in an amount
commensurate with that she would have received had there been no
involuntary delay in her promotion.




                                  ______Barbara Ellis________________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040008486                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051019                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT PLUS                              |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  310  |131.0000/PROMOTION                      |
|2.  315                 |131.0500/DATE OF RANK                   |
|3.  283                 |128.0000/PAY AND ALLOWANCES             |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]