Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040009580C070208
Original file (20040009580C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        25 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040009580


      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. Robert J. McGowan             |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James E. Anderholm            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Jose A. Martinez              |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. LaVerne M Douglas             |     |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 that his effective date of promotion be adjusted
and that he receive all due back pay and allowances.

2.  The applicant states that he was not promoted at the appropriate time
because he lacked a valid security clearance.  He adds he did everything he
could in advance of his promotion date to obtain his clearance.

3.  The applicant provides:

      a.  A self-authored letter dated 28 October 2004.

      b.  A copy of email from his unit security manager, dated 17
September 2003, stating, as of 28 January 2003, his security clearance was
valid, but that he was awaiting adjudication.

      c.  A copy of a memorandum for record, dated 28 January 2003, from
his unit security manager, subject:  Verification of Security Clearance.

      d.  A copy of US Army Human Resources Command (HRC) – St. Louis,
Missouri, dated 16 June 2004, subject:  Promotion as a Reserve Commissioned
Warrant Officer of the Army, showing an effective date of promotion of 16
June 2004, with a date of rank of 5 August 2003 (sic).

      e.  HRC-St. Louis web site document, subject:  Promotion Information.

      f.  Permanent Orders 064-001, Headquarters, US Army Fort Dix, dated
5 March 2003, directing overseas deployment of the applicant's unit.

      g.  NATO Travel Order Number 064-001.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is a Chief Warrant Officer Three (CW3) in the US Army
Reserve (USAR) Retired Reserve.  He was selected for promotion by the
Calendar Year (CY) 2002 CW3/CW4/CW5 Promotion Board which adjourned on 9
May 2002.  His projected promotion date and effective date of rank was 5
August 2003.

2.  The applicant stated he completed "security clearance re-verification
forms" and submitted them to his unit security officer in September 2002.
In January 2003, he was mobilized for Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF).  His
security clearance expired in June 2003 while he was in Southwest Asia.  He
tried every available means to re-verify his clearance prior to his
promotion eligibility date of 5 August 2003.

3.  The applicant was promoted to CW3 with an effective date of 16 June
2004 and a date of rank of 5 August 2003.

4.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from
the Military Personnel Actions Branch, HRC-St. Louis which states the
applicant did not meet all of the criteria outlined in Army Regulation (AR)
135-155 for promotion to CW3.  Specifically, he did not have a valid
security clearance until 5 August 2003 (sic).  This date is actually the
date the applicant was eligible for promotion, not the date of his security
clearance.  The applicant was provided an opportunity to respond to the
advisory opinion and, on 20 April 2005, he argued that, based on the
advisory opinion, he should have been promoted.

5.  Army Regulation (AR) 635-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and
Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) prescribes policy and
procedures used for selecting and promoting commissioned officers (other
than commissioned warrant officers) of the Army National Guard of the
United States (ARNGUS) and of commissioned and warrant officers (WO) of the
U.S. Army Reserve (USAR).  It provides, in pertinent part, a warrant
officer who has been recommended for promotion to the next higher grade
must meet the requirements listed below before being promoted in the
Reserve components:  be serving in an active status; be in the zone of
consideration; be medically qualified; have undergone a favorable security
screening; meet standards of the Army Body Composition Program; and be a
satisfactory participant.

6.  AR 604-5 (Department of the Army Personnel Security Program Regulation)
establishes policies and procedures to ensure that the acceptance and
retention of personnel are consistent with national security interests.
The regulation establishes personnel security policies and procedures,
including the granting of security clearances.  It provides, in pertinent
part, that following all forms of background investigation, the
adjudication process is the final step in determining whether a person is
eligible for access to classified information or assignment to sensitive
duties.  Once adjudication is completed, the level of security clearance
granted and the date final clearance is granted are recorded.  This used to
be accomplished on DA Form 873 (Certificate of Clearance and/or Security
Determination), but today it is recorded in Item 11 of the Officer Record
Brief (ORB).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant received a security clearance based on an expanded
national agency check in June 1993.  His clearance was valid for 10 years
and expired in June 2003.

2.  The applicant required a valid security clearance in order to be
promoted to CW3.  This means that all investigative efforts must have been
completed, the adjudication process concluded, and a DA Form 873 issued or
the ORB annotated.

3.  The 17 September 2003 email from the applicant's security manager
clearly states that investigative efforts were completed, but the
applicant's security clearance had not yet been adjudicated.  This was more
than 1 month after the applicant's projected promotion date of 5 August
2003.

4.  The applicant's records do not contain a DA Form 873, nor does his ORB
show a final security clearance or date.  A check of records at
Headquarters, US Army Reserve Command, Fort McPherson, Georgia indicates
that the applicant still does not possess a final valid security clearance.
 He does have an interim clearance which was granted in June 2004.

5.  There is no error or injustice in this case.  The applicant has
provided no evidence, nor does the record show that he obtained a valid
final security clearance on or before 5 August 2003.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__jea___  __jam___  __lmd___  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.




                                        James E. Anderholm
                                  ______________________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040009580                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051025                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |131.0400                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070015787

    Original file (20070015787.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 1 August 2006, HRC-Alexandria, Virginia, published Orders A-09-409086A01, amending Orders A-09-409086, dated 7 September 2004, to read the additional instruction “effective 28 October 2004, all Reserve Component warrant officers ordered to active duty for operational support will remain in the Reserve component promotion system.” 5. In an advisory opinion obtained in the processing of this case on 27 December 2007, the Chief, Special Actions Branch, Reserve Promotions, HRC-St Louis,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000016

    Original file (20110000016.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his dates of rank for promotion to the ranks of major through colonel be adjusted to reflect the correct dates. However, there was no evidence of him having a security clearance and he was not promoted until 12 October 2000, the date his interim clearance was granted. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to show that he obtained a clearance prior to 12 October 2000, there appears to be no basis to grant his request.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060005443C070205

    Original file (20060005443C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He advised the applicant that his date of rank would be 1 February 2005, unless he could submit proof that he had a valid security clearance before that date. The policy states a second lieutenant will be promoted to first lieutenant with a date of rank of 1 February 2005, without a current physical, security clearance, and APFT. The evidence shows that promotion authorities verified that the applicant had failed the APFT and did not have a valid security clearance at the time he...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010971

    Original file (20070010971.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The evidence of record in this case appears to show the applicant was not promoted on his PED because he did not possess a valid security clearance; however, it provides no information regarding why a security screening of his record was not completed at the time, or why his security clearance packet was not properly processed. The evidence of record also shows that he was promoted to CPT on 29 August 2006, 3 years, 6 months, and 3 days after he was promoted to 1LT on 4 February 2003. As a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018990

    Original file (20070018990.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The database reflects that the applicant had an outdated physical and an outdated security clearance and could not be promoted to CW3 based on policy in effect at the time. When an officer does not meet the qualification for promotion, the promotion effective date and the date of rank may be advanced to the date qualifications are met. The evidence of record shows that at the time of his selection for promotion to CW3, the applicant had an outdated physical and an outdated security clearance.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070006828C080407

    Original file (20070006828C080407.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application: Department of the Army (DA), Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, Memorandum, dated 10 February 2005, Subject: Promotion of Reserve Component (RC) Officers on a Promotion List Resulting from a Mandatory Promotion Board; Promotion Memorandum, dated 10 August 2000; IRR Transfer Orders, dated 27 June 2002; Promotion Orders, dated 31 May 2005; and ARNG Separation Orders, dated 20 February 2002. Headquarters,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004549C070206

    Original file (20050004549C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a memorandum, dated 21 February 2003, the Chief, Military Personnel Actions Branch, HRC, advised the 81st RSC, and the applicant, that she was not in a promotable status due to the following disqualifications found in the database: she did not have a current qualifying Physical Examination (less than 5 years old), she did not possess a valid security clearance, and she was not assigned to a valid position. A Promotion Memorandum, dated 10 February 2005, was issued to the applicant...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017642

    Original file (20080017642.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). These orders indicated the applicant had a Secret security clearance. There is no information regarding why the final clearance eligibility was delayed and there is no evidence of record or independent evidence provided by the applicant that shows he was granted an interim Secret clearance or higher at anytime during the security clearance investigative process.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004460

    Original file (20130004460.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests the transfer of his General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) and all allied documents within his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) (formerly known as the Official Military Personnel File) from the performance section to the restricted section. The applicant states: * the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB) previously recommended the transfer of his GOMOR to the restricted section of his AMHRR; however, the Deputy Director of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003446C070206

    Original file (20050003446C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, adjustment to his date of rank for lieutenant colonel from 5 March 2004 to the release date of his promotion selection board. He was promoted to lieutenant colonel effective 5 March 2004 and awarded a TS security clearance effective 21 July 2004. The evidence of record shows the applicant was promoted to lieutenant colonel on a date prior to being awarded an updated security clearance; therefore, as a matter of equity, it would be fair to adjust his...