RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        19 July 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050014136


      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 Vick                    |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Barbara J. Ellis              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Donald Lewy                   |     |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, in effect, further adjustment to his date of
rank for captain and promotion consideration to major under the 2006 year
criteria.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he would like his date of rank
reviewed.  He believes his current date of rank of 21 November 2000 is
incorrect and should have been 26 July 2000.  If his date of rank is
changed to 26 July 2000, he would request that he be considered for
promotion to major under the 2006 year criteria.  The March 2006 board
considered captains with date of rank of 31 August 2000 and earlier.  He
graduated from Officer Candidate School (OCS) on 25 July 1993 and accepted
a commission as a second lieutenant with a date of rank of 26 July 1993.
Three years later he was promoted to first lieutenant on 25 July 1996.  He
believes his current date of rank for captain should be 4 years from his
promotion to first lieutenant instead of nearly 4 years and 4 months.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his OCS diploma, his appointment
orders, his promotion orders for first lieutenant, his promotion memorandum
for captain, and his DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation
Report), in support of his case.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's military records show that he was appointed in the
Minnesota Army National Guard (MNARNG), as a second lieutenant, effective
26 July 1993. He was promoted to first lieutenant effective 25 July 1996.
He was separated from the MNARNG effective 28 March 1999 and transferred to
a United States Army Reserve unit.

2.  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
25 July 2000.

3.  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.  Based on his MYIG he should have been
considered by the 1999 RCSB that convened on 9 November and recessed on 10
December 1999.  He was promoted to captain effective 20 March 2001.

4.  On 3 July 2002, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records
(ABCMR) recommended the applicant's promotion effective date and date of
rank for captain be corrected to 21 November 2000, the date the applicant
was assigned to a captain's position, under the Reserve Officer Personnel
Management Act (ROPMA) Project.  The applicant was issued a promotion
memorandum on 26 April 2001, correcting his promotion effective date and
date of rank for captain to 21 November 2000, with entitlement to back pay
and allowances based on these adjustments.

5.  The Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Human Resources Command
(HRC) – St. Louis, Missouri, verified that the Secretary of the Army
established the promotion zone for the 2006 Major RCSB for captains with
dates of rank for captain of 31 August 2000 and earlier.

6.  Based on completion of the required 7 years MYIG, his MYIG date for
promotion to major is 20 November 2007.

7.  In an advisory opinion, dated 16 December 2005, the Chief, Promotions
Branch, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, HRC – St. Louis, stated
that the applicant was selected by the 2000 Captain RCSB which convened on
13 November 2000.  The board was approved on 20 March 2001 and was released
on 25 April 2001.  The applicant was included in ROPMA Project, Phase IV.
The applicant was given 21 November 2000 as his date of rank based on the
information given to the ABCMR and the date he was assigned to the higher
graded position.  Based on these facts, it was recommended the applicant's
request be denied.

8.  The opinion was forwarded to the applicant for his acknowledgment and
or rebuttal on 10 February 2006.  He did not respond.

9.  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 ABCMR which could adjust dates of rank for those who were
first-time considered and selected for promotion to captain, after having
served more than 7 combined MYIG as a lieutenant.

10.  Army Regulation 135-155, prescribed the policies and procedures for
the promotion of Reserve officers.  This regulation specifies 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 regulation also specifies that officers in the grade of captain may be
promoted to major upon completion of 7 years MYIG, selection by a mandatory
promotion board, and have met all requirements for promotion.  An officer
selected for the first time for promotion to the next higher grade may be
promoted on or before the date that he/she completes the maximum years of
service.

11.  Army Regulation 135-155 also specifies that officers will receive
mandatory promotion consideration prior to their promotion eligibility
dates (MYIG) so that, if selected, they may be promoted on their future
promotion eligibility dates.  The regulation also specifies that the
Secretary of the Army or his or her designee will establish the zone of
consideration for each mandatory promotion board for commissioned officers.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not
entitled to further adjustment to his date of rank for captain and
promotion consideration to major under the 2006 year criteria.  He has not
shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.

2.  The applicant's contentions that he believes his current date of rank
for captain is incorrect and should have been 26 July 2000 have been noted.
 However, based on his appointment effective date of 26 July 1993 and
completion of 7 combined MYIG as a lieutenant, the 1999 promotion board was
the earliest board he was eligible to be considered for promotion on or
before his MYIG date under the ROPMA criteria.  He completed 7 combined
MYIG as a lieutenant on 25 July 2000.

3.  The applicant's promotion effective date and date of rank was adjusted
to 21 November 2000 under the ROPMA Project based on his assignment to a
higher grade position on that date.  The applicant's records do not
indicate he was assigned to a captain's position prior to that date and his
current request does not show that he was assigned to a captain position
prior to 21 November 2000.  Therefore, without such proof his date of rank
and effective date for promotion has been correctly established by ROPMA.
Based on his date of rank for captain of 21 November 2000 and completion of
7 years MYIG, he may be eligible for promotion to major upon selection
prior to his MYIG date of 20 November 2007.

4.  The established promotion zone for the 2006 Major RCSB was for captains
with dates of rank of 31 August 2000 and earlier.  Therefore, the
applicant's adjusted date of rank for captain of 21 November 2000 did not
place him in the established promotion zone for consideration.
5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__JEV__   __BJE___  _DLL____  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. Vick________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050014136                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060719                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |131.00                                  |
|2.                      |131.05                                  |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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