RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        23 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050003829


      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             |
|     |Mrs. Victoria A. Donaldson        |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Kathleen A. Newman            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. William D. Powers             |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Marla J. N. Troup             |     |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 date of commission as a second lieutenant be
changed from 10 June 2004 to 1 November 2002.

2.  The applicant states that she received her certification as a Physician
Assistant in October 2002 and contends she should have been commissioned at
that time.

3.  The applicant stated that she provides a time-line of events, letters
from her command, and letters and a phone log from a Senator's office.
However, only the time-line of events and one letter from the brigade
surgeon was attached to the application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Records show the applicant served a period of enlisted service prior to
her commissioning as a second lieutenant in the Washington Army National
Guard (WAARNG).

2.  Records show that on 10 October 2002 the applicant was awarded the
Physician Assistant-Certified designation by the National Commission on
Certification of Physician Assistants.

3.  The applicant's records contain a NGB Form 62-E (Application for
Federal Recognition as an Army National Guard Officer or Warrant Officer
and Appointment as a Reserve Commissioned Officer or Warrant Officer of the
Army in the Army National Guard of the United States), dated 2 December
2003, which shows the applicant applied for Federal Recognition in the
grade of second lieutenant.  This form further shows that the Adjutant
General of the State of Washington approved the application on 16 June 2004
and requested the applicant be granted Federal Recognition in the grade of
second lieutenant with the effective date 10 June 2004

4.  WAARNG Orders Number 292-4, dated 18 October 2004, show the applicant
was discharged from the Army National Guard and the Reserve of the Army in
the grade of sergeant/pay grade E-5 effective 9 June 2004.

5.  NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), with the
effective date 9 June 2004, shows the applicant was discharged for the
purpose of appointment as a commissioned or warrant officer.

6.  WAARNG Orders Number 166-003, dated 14 June 2004, show the applicant
was appointed as a second lieutenant in the WAARNG effective 10 June 2004.
These orders further show that the applicant was a direct appointment, that
she must complete Officer Basic Course no later than 10 June 2005, and that
her temporary Federal Recognition expired on 9 December 2004.

7.  The applicant's records contain a DA Form 71 (Oath of Office-Military
Personnel) which shows the applicant executed an Oath of Office as a
Reserve Commissioned officer on 27 October 2004.  This form contains the
entry "EDATE [Effective Date]:  10 June 2004."

8.  National Guard Bureau Federal Recognition Orders Number 162 AR, dated
29 June 2004, awarded the applicant permanent Federal Recognition for
initial appointment to the grade of second lieutenant, effective 10 June
2004.  These orders show the applicant's date of rank as a second
lieutenant was 15 August 2003.

9.  The applicant provides a two-page chronological time-line of events
which essentially stated she was advised upon her graduation from Physician
Assistant School and Physician Assistant certification she would be granted
commission as a second lieutenant.

10.  The applicant continued that from August 2003 until the time she was
commissioned on 10 June 2004 she experienced many difficulties regarding
her commission and with various chains of command.  The applicant concludes
she was promised a commission two years earlier than it actually occurred
and, as a result, she has lost two years of promotion and retirement
points.

11.  The applicant also provided a 6 August 2004 memorandum from the
Brigade Surgeon of the 81st Brigade Combat Team.  This memorandum stated
the applicant served as a sergeant in the position of medic while assigned
to the 81st Combat Team and she showed both a good attitude and technical
expertise.

12.  The surgeon further stated the applicant demonstrated her loyalty by
staying in the WAARNG while she was attending the Physician Assistant
School and that she was promised a direct commission if she stayed with her
current medical company.   The surgeon argues that the applicant could have
transferred to the South Dakota Army National Guard and been commissioned
as a second lieutenant upon her completion of the Physician Assistant
School but she chose to stay with the WAARNG to await her commission.

13.  The surgeon concluded the applicant should have been commissioned over
two years ago and it is in the best interest of the Army to waive the time-
in grade requirement for promotion to first lieutenant.

14.  Paragraph 2-4a(1) of Army Regulation 135-101 (Appointment of Reserve
Commissioned Officers for Assignment to Army Medical Department Branches)
states that Army National Guard personnel will apply to the Chief, National
Guard Bureau for appointment as a commissioned officer.

15.  Paragraph 3-1 of Army Regulation 135-101 states the grade and date of
rank upon original appointment and assignment to an Army Medical Department
branch will be determined by the number of years of entry grade credit
awarded.

16.  Paragraph 2-7 of Army Regulation 135-100 (Appointment of Commissioned
and Warrant Officers of the Army) states, in pertinent part, a signed oath
of office is required for appointment as a commissioned officer in any
component of the Army.  This paragraph further states the execution and
return of the oath of office constitutes acceptance of appointment as a
commissioned officer.

17.  National Guard Regulation 600-100 (Commissioned Officers - Federal
Recognition and Related Personnel Actions) provides procedures for
processing all applications for Federal Recognition.  Paragraph 2-1 states
that commissioned officers of the ARNG are appointed by the several States
under Article 1, Section 8 of the U. S. Constitution.  These appointments
may be federally recognized by the Chief, NGB under such regulations as the
Secretary of the Army may prescribe and under the provisions of this
regulation.  Officers who are federally recognized in a particular grade
and branch shall be tendered an appointment in the same grade as Reserve
commissioned officers of the Army with assignment to the Army National
Guard of the United States if they have not already accepted such
appointment.

18.  National Guard Regulation 600-100, paragraph 2-2 states that the
effective date of Federal recognition for original appointment is that date
on which the commissioned officer executes the oath of office in the State.
 Paragraph 2-3a states that temporary Federal Recognition upon initial
appointment establishes the authorized grade to be used by all officers in
their federally recognized status.






DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that her date of commission as a second
lieutenant should be changed from 10 June 2004 to 1 November 2002 because
the WAARNG did not timely process her requests for appointment as a
commissioned officer.

2.  Evidence of record shows the applicant did not apply for appointment
and Federal recognition in the WAARNG until 2 December 2003.  This
application was not approved by the Adjutant General of the State of
Washington until 16 June 2004

3.  WAARNG Orders show the applicant was appointed as a second lieutenant
on 10 June 2004.

4.  National Guard Bureau Federal Recognition Orders Number awarded the
applicant permanent Federal Recognition for initial appointment to the
grade of second lieutenant with the effective date 10 June 2004.  These
orders further show the applicant was awarded constructive credit for prior
service, and therefore, her date of rank to second lieutenant was
determined to be 15 August 2003.

5.  There is no evidence that the applicant applied for appointment as a
commissioned officer prior to the 2 December 2003 application for
appointment in the WAARNG.  There also is no evidence that any prior
application was denied.

6.  Although the Brigade Surgeon of the 81st Brigade Combat Team stated
that the applicant was denied commission as a second lieutenant for over
two years, he clearly stated in his letter of support the applicant chose
to wait until a position was available.  Therefore, this conclusively shows
the applicant made a voluntary choice to remain in an enlisted status with
the WAARNG.

7.  There is no evidence the WAARNG officials failed to properly process
the applicant's request for appointment as a commissioned officer.

8.  Based on the foregoing, the applicant's date of appointment (10 June
2004) as a second lieutenant and her date of rank (15 August 2003) as a
second lieutenant in the WAARNG are correct as currently constituted.



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_KAN___  __WDP__  __MT____  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.





                                  __Kathleen A. Newman_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050003829                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/08/23                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |Deny                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |125.0000.0000                           |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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