RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        17 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050013386


      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. Lester Echols                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John E. Denning               |     |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 adjustment to his date of rank (DOR) for captain
from 5 August 2000 to 5 August 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 copies of his ARPC Form 155-R (Promotion
Qualification Statement), his baccalaureate degree, his Army National Guard
appointment orders, his promotion orders for first lieutenant, and his
active duty assignment orders.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's military records show that he was appointed in the
North Carolina Army National Guard as a second lieutenant effective
7 August 1992.  He was promoted to first lieutenant effective 6 August
1995.

2.  His ARPC Form 155-R and assignment orders verify that he was assigned
to a captain's position effective 6 March 1999.

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
6 August 1999.

4.  The applicant was considered and selected for promotion to captain by
the 1999 Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB), which convened on
9 November and recessed on 10 December 1999.  The President approved the
board results on 18 April 2000.  Based on his MYIG he should have been
considered by the 1998 RCSB that the President approved on 1 April 1999.
He was promoted to captain effective 5 August 2000.

5.  He was separated from the North Carolina Army National Guard effective
1 September 2000 and transferred to the United States Army Control Group
(Reinforcements).  He was reassigned to a Reserve troop program unit
effective 24 October 2000.

6.  He was mobilized effective 25 August 2004 and is currently serving on
active duty.

7.  The applicant's records show that he met the requirements, i.e.,
military education, active status, medical qualification, and security
clearance for promotion purposes on his MYIG.

8.  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.

9.  The Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act (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 serve a MYIG of 2 years before promotion to first lieutenant,
and a first lieutenant 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 second lieutenant and 4 years as a first
lieutenant before promotion to captain.

10.  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.  Promotion policy also
requires completion of the necessary military education (officer basic
course) and civilian education (baccalaureate degree).

11.  The ROPMA promotion boards for captains were administratively delayed.
 Presidential approval 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 normal processing, the 1998 RCSB,
which convened on 9 November and recessed 11 December 1998, should have
been approved on 21 March 1999.

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 21 March 1999, the date final board action should have occurred had the
1998 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 and met
all other prerequisites for promotion on 21 March 1999.

4.  The applicant was precluded from equitable promotion consideration,
unlike others in his grade in earlier and later year groups who were
considered before and after him, and was unjustly considered well after his
eligibility.  He was eligible for promotion consideration prior to his MYIG
date so that, if selected, he could 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 further delay for
promotion board proceeding preparation and processing for Presidential
approval compounded the unfair circumstances.  It is concluded therefore,
that had he been timely considered for promotion prior to his MYIG date,
and based on his first time consideration and selection, a reasonable
chance would have resulted that he would have been selected and 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.

5.  In view of the foregoing, and insofar as the Department of the Army is
concerned, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended
below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

_JRM___  __LE____  _JRM___  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 the State of North Carolina Army National Guard and
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 21 March 1999, with entitlement to the pay and
allowances in the higher grade on that date.




                                  __    _Lester Echols_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050013386                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051117                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT PLUS                              |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |131.00                                  |
|2.                      |131.05                                  |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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