RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        25 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050012102


      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. Stephanie Thompkins           |     |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 adjustment to his date of rank (DOR) for captain
from 20 March 2001 to 19 September 1999.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his DOR should be adjusted to a
date that reflects a maximum of 7 combined years service as a lieutenant.

3.  The applicant provides his ARPC Form 155-R (Promotion Qualification
Statement), copies of his completion document for the officer basic course
and baccalaureate degree, his appointment memorandum, and his promotion
memorandums for first lieutenant and captain.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's military records show that he was appointed in the
United States Army Reserve as a second lieutenant effective 15 May 1993.
He was promoted to first lieutenant effective 28 May 1996.

2.  His officer evaluation reports for the periods 19 September 1999
through 18 September 2000 and 19 September 2000 through 18 September 2001
show that he was serving in a captain's position.

3.  Based on the maximum of 7 combined years of service as a lieutenant,
his maximum years of service in grade (MYIG) for promotion to captain was
14 May 2000.

4.  The applicant was considered and selected for promotion to captain by
the 2000 Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB), which convened on
13 November and recessed on 15 December 2000.  The President approved the
board results on 20 March 2001.  He was promoted to captain effective
20 March 2001.  Based on his MYIG he should have been considered by the
1999 RCSB that the President approved on 18 April 2000.

5.  The applicant's records show that he completed the required military
and civilian education for promotion prior to being promoted to captain and
prior to his eligibility (MYIG) date.  The Promotion Qualification
Statement submitted by the applicant verified the required position
assignment, active status, medical qualification, and security clearance
for promotion purposes.



6.  On 3 December 1997, the Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary
(Manpower and Reserve Affairs) acknowledged that pertinent Army agencies
had agreed that the faulty promotion policy for promotion to captain should
be revised, and that actions would be initiated for this purpose.  He
further stated that affected individuals would be advised they could seek
relief from the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) which
could adjust DOR’s for those who were first-time considered and selected
for promotion to captain, after having served more than 7 combined MYIG as
a lieutenant.

7.  The ROPMA prescribed the policies and procedures to consolidate and
modernize the laws governing the management of Reserve component officers.
ROPMA specified that a second lieutenant (2LT) serve a MYIG of 2 years
before promotion to 1LT, and a 1LT serve a MYIG of 5 years before promotion
to captain.  The Reserve Officer Personnel Act in effect prior to ROPMA
required completion of 3 years as a 2LT and 4 years as a 1LT before
promotion to captain.

8.  ROPMA further specifies that the officer must be serving in a position
requiring the higher grade or assigned to the Individual Ready Reserve or
an Individual Mobilization Augmentee position.  Officers serving in the
Individual Ready Reserve will be promoted on the date they complete their
MYIG.  Promotion policy also requires completion of the necessary military
education (officer basic course) and civilian education (baccalaureate
degree).

9.  The ROPMA promotion boards for captains were administratively delayed.
The Presidential approvals of the results of the pertinent promotion boards
were also administratively delayed.  Based on normal processing, they
should have been convened earlier and approved approximately 100 days after
the respective recess dates.  Based on the normal processing the 1999 RCSB,
which convened on 9 November and recessed 10 December 1999 should have been
approved on 20 March 2000.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is entitled to
an adjustment to his promotion effective date and date of rank for captain
to 20 March 2000, the date final board action should have occurred had the
1999 RCSB been timely processed for promotion on or before his MYIG date.



2.  Although the applicant was selected for promotion to captain the first
time he was considered after the enactment of ROPMA, the untimely promotion
consideration and delay of his promotion created an injustice that should
now be corrected.

3.  The applicant was otherwise qualified for promotion to captain with an
adjusted DOR, as determined by his appropriate commander/manager, and met
all other prerequisites for promotion on 20 March 2000.

4.  The applicant was prevented from equitable promotion, unlike others in
his grade in earlier and later year groups who were promoted before and
after him, and was unjustly promoted well after his eligibility.  He was
eligible for promotion prior to his MYIG date so that, if selected, he may
have been promoted on or prior to his MYIG date.  He was unjustly required
to serve in grade beyond the 7 years required by ROPMA and denied timely
consideration.  The delay for promotion board proceeding preparation and
processing for Presidential approval compounded the unfair circumstances.
It is concluded therefore, that had the promotion boards been timely
processed prior to his MYIG date, and based on his selection, a reasonable
chance would have resulted that he would have been respectively promoted on
or before his MYIG date, and entitled to an earlier promotion, an adjusted
DOR, and entitled to the pay and allowances in the higher grade.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

_JEA____  __JAM__  ___LMD_  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board
recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual
concerned be corrected by showing he was promoted to captain with an
adjusted promotion effective date and date of rank of 20 March 2000, with
entitlement to the pay and allowances in the higher grade on that date.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
an adjustment to his promotion effective date and date of rank for captain
to 19 September 1999.




                                  ____James E. Anderholm____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050012102                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/10/25                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT PARTIAL                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |131.00                                  |
|2.                      |131.05                                  |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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