Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004240C070206
Original file (20050004240C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        20 December 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050004240


      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:

|     |Mr. James C. Hise                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Ronald E. Blakely             |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Jeanette R. McCants           |     |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 the effective date of rank as a second
lieutenant be corrected to show the date 1 April 2003.

2.  The applicant states his direct commission packet was suspended after
being approved because he was deployed in an enlisted status in Iraq.  He
continues that he was deployed to Operation Iraqi Freedom and that he was
commissioned the day he returned.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement; a memorandum from his
commander; a memorandum from the Army Medical Department (AMEDD) recruiter;
a copy of his Predetermination Review Board packet; Washington Army
National Guard (WAARNG) Orders Number 247-03; an Oath of Office, dated
28 August 2003; National Guard Bureau Federal Recognition Orders AR 256;
and a copy of his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Records show the applicant served as an enlisted Soldier in the WAARNG
prior to being commissioned as second lieutenant.

2.  The applicant's records show that on 10 March 2003, the applicant's age
and age in grade waiver for appointment as a commissioned officer was
approved by the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel of the WAARNG.

3.  The applicant's records contain a copy of the direct appointment packet
which shows the applicant was recommended for direct appointment as a
commissioned officer in the WAARNG.  This packet also shows the appointment
was suspended pending the applicant's return to the State of Washington and
subsequent predetermination action.

4.  On 25 August 2003, a Federal Recognition Board was held by the WAARNG
to determine if the applicant was qualified to be awarded Federal
Recognition.  The proceedings indicated the applicant was satisfactory in
his physical qualifications, moral character and general qualifications.

5.  The applicant's records contain a NGB Form 22 (National Guard Bureau-
Report of Separation and Record of Service).  This form shows the applicant
was separated from the WAARNG as a sergeant first class/ pay grade E-7 on
27 August 2003 for the purpose of accepting appointment as a commissioned
officer.
6.  On 28 August 2003, the applicant executed an Oath of Office as a second
lieutenant in the WAARNG and was granted temporary Federal Recognition.

7.  WAARNG Orders Number 247-03, dated 4 September 2003, show the applicant
was appointed as a second lieutenant in the WAARNG effective 28 August
2003.

8.  A U.S. Total Army Personnel Command memorandum, dated 30 September
2003, shows the applicant was appointed as a Reserve Commissioned Officer
of the Army effective 28 August 2003.

9.  National Guard Bureau Federal Recognition Orders Number 256 AR, dated
7 October 2003, awarded the applicant permanent Federal Recognition for
initial appointment to the grade of second lieutenant, effective 28 August
2003.

10.  The applicant provided a letter of support from an AMEDD technician
for the WAARNG.  The AMEDD Technician stated the applicant began his
pursuit of his commission as a physician's assistant in early 2000 and that
his packet was forwarded to an AMEDD Board but was returned pending
approval of a medical waiver.

11.  The technician continued that the applicant's waiver was disapproved
twice by the National Guard Bureau Surgeon.  He continues that the
applicant again sought his commission while deployed in Iraq, that his
medical waiver was approved while he was in Iraq and that the applicant had
to wait until he returned from deployment before he could become a
commissioned officer.

12.  The technician concluded that had the applicant's medical waiver been
approved the first time, the applicant would have been commissioned in late
2000 or early 2001.

13.  There is no evidence in the applicant's records which shows he applied
for a waiver of a medical condition nor is there evidence which shows that
such a request was denied on any occasion.

14.  The applicant submitted a memorandum from the Commander of Alpha
Company, 1st Battalion, 19th Special Forces Group (Airborne), dated 3
February 2005.  The unit commander stated the applicant's predetermination
packet was approved in February 2003 and signed by the brigadier general on
10 March 2003.  He continues the applicant's appointment was suspended
until his return from Operation Iraqi Freedom and the end of his Title 10
status on 27 August 2003.
15.  The unit commander contends the applicant was unable to appear before
the Federal Recognition Board until 28 August 2003, the date of his
appointment.

16.  The unit commander states the applicant's date of appointment as a
second lieutenant should be adjusted to 1 April 2003, the date of first
Federal Recognition Board that the applicant would have appeared before if
he was not deployed.

17.  National Guard Regulation 600-100 (Commissioned Officer-Federal
Recognition and Related Personnel Actions) provides procedures for
processing all applications for Federal Recognition.  Paragraph 2-1 states
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 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 the effective date of his initial appointment as
a second lieutenant should be changed to 1 April 2003.

2.  Although, the applicant provided a letter from an AMEDD technician
which stated his direct appointment packet was delayed twice because of
denial of a medical waiver by the National Guard Bureau Surgeon, there is
no evidence and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence which
shows he requested a medical waiver or that such a waiver was not processed
in accordance with applicable regulations.

3.  Evidence of records shows the applicant applied for direct appointment
while serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom and the brigadier
 general with approval authority, approved the direct appointment packet
with the stipulation that it would not be executed until the applicant
returned from his deployment in Iraq.
4.  Records show the applicant separated from his enlisted status on 27
August 2003 for the purpose of accepting a commission as a second
lieutenant.

5.  The applicant executed an oath of office on 28 August 2003 and was
appointed by WAARNG as a second lieutenant.

6.  Based on the fact the applicant applied for appointment as a
commissioned officer while he deployed to Operation Iraqi Freedom and the
general officer with approval authority of his direct appointment packet
clearly stated the applicant would not be appointed until his return from
deployment, the applicant's date of appointment in the WAARNG is correct as
currently constituted.  Therefore, there is no basis to grant the relief
requested.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__JCH___  __REB__  _JRM ___  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 C. Hise______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050004240                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/12/20                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007518

    Original file (20060007518.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant essentially states that her initial appointment to 2LT was 12 December 2002, but an error at the State level made it necessary to execute her oaths of office again on 14 January 2004. The applicant provides the following evidence in support of this application: a. a memorandum, dated 24 May 2006, from the State Surgeon of the Florida Army National Guard (ARNG), Florida Medical Detachment; b. a memorandum, dated 27 April 2005, from a lieutenant colonel at the Recruiting and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003829C070206

    Original file (20050003829C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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). 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. Evidence of record shows the applicant did not apply for appointment and Federal recognition in the WAARNG until 2 December 2003.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011051

    Original file (20110011051.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's NGB Form 0122E shows he was granted Federal Recognition in the grade of 2LT on 16 October 2009. 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. NGR 600-100, paragraph 10-15b states that temporary Federal Recognition may be granted by a Federal...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001259

    Original file (20080001259.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    National Guard Regulation 600-100, paragraph 10-15b states that temporary Federal Recognition may be granted by an Federal Recognition Board to those eligible when the board finds that the member has successfully passed the examination prescribed herein, has subscribed to the oath of office, and has been appointed by a State order for assignment to a position vacancy in a federally recognized unit of the ARNG. There is no evidence the NVARNG forwarded a Federal Recognition packet to the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060006312C070205

    Original file (20060006312C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Records show the applicant was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant in the State of Washington Army National Guard (WAARNG) effective 29 December 1992. The Chief of Personnel Division states that the applicant received Federal Recognition for his initial appointment as a first lieutenant with an effective date and date of rank as 29 December 1992 and completed the AMEDD Officer Basic Course on 19 May 1995. There is no evidence and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050014202C070206

    Original file (20050014202C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    National Guard Bureau Federal Recognition Orders Number 189 AR, dated 22 June 2005, show the applicant was awarded permanent Federal recognition in the grade of captain for initial appointment in the Dental Corps/reappointment from Medical Services Corps effective 23 April 2005. Based on the recommendations of the second MAARNG Federal Recognition Board, the National Guard Bureau issued orders awarding the applicant permanent Federal Recognition for initial appointment as a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010002

    Original file (20080010002.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected to show that he received permanent Federal recognition for initial appointment as a second lieutenant in the Pennsylvania Army National Guard National (PAARNG) on 29 September 2005. There is no evidence that the applicant received permanent Federal recognition as a second lieutenant from the National Guard Bureau within the six month period required by National Guard/Army regulations. However, should the initial period of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070001329

    Original file (20070001329.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, should the initial period of temporary Federal Recognition expire due to administrative processing delays, through no fault of the member, a subsequent Federal Recognition Board should be convened to consider the request again and grant another new period of temporary Federal Recognition if warranted. National Guard Regulation 600-100, paragraph 10-15b states that temporary Federal Recognition may be granted by a Federal Recognition Board to those eligible when the board finds that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010191C071113

    Original file (20060010191C071113.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The NGB officials recommended approval of adjusting the applicant's date of rank to 18 May 2005, due to the applicant was never found not qualified for promotion by his battalion commander, and the unit personnel never submitted his first lieutenant promotion packet to the MSARNG before his 24 months of service in accordance with ROPMA and the National Guard Regulation 600-100. The evidence shows that the applicant was eligible for promotion to first lieutenant on 18 May 2005; however, his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040002112C070208

    Original file (20040002112C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence that NGB awarded permanent Federal Recognition to the applicant to show that he was promoted to the grade of first lieutenant. If the member meets the qualifications and requirements for Federal Recognition, the Chief, NGB extends permanent Federal Recognition to the member in the grade and branch in which the member is qualified. Records show that the applicant was granted temporary Federal Recognition effective 12 August 2001 upon his initial appointment in...