RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        26 September 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050017802


      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. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Marla J. Troup                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Chester A. Damian             |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Edward E. Montgomery          |     |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 that her date of rank (DOR) to captain (CPT) be
adjusted from 18 April 2000 to 22 August 1999.

2.  The applicant states that she was an Active Guard Reserve (AGR) first
lieutenant (1LT) and was assigned to a CPT’s position on 22 August 1999.
The governing regulation states that AGR officers will be promoted
effective on their promotion eligibility date (PED) provided they are
attached to a position in the higher grade.  The PED will then become the
DOR.  Her DOR was not adjusted to meet the date she was assigned to the
CPT’s position.

3.  The applicant provides a 6 August 2005 letter to the Office of
Promotions, Reserve Component, U. S. Army Human Resources Command –St.
Louis (USAHRC – STL); her active duty orders; an Officer Evaluation Report
(OER) for the period ending 16 January 2001; her DA Form 2B (Personnel
Qualification Record – Reserve); her CPT promotion orders; and a Finance
Group History Document (a manning document).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  After having had prior enlisted service, the applicant was commissioned
a second lieutenant (2LT) in the U. S. Army Reserve out of the Reserve
Officers’ Training Corps Program on 19 January 1994.  She was promoted to
1LT on      20 May 1997.  Effective with the enactment of the Reserve
Officers Management Act (ROPMA) on 1 October 1996 (which changed the time
in grade (TIG) requirement for promotion to 1LT from 3 years to 2 years),
her DOR to 1LT was adjusted to 1 October 1996.

2.  Effective 22 August 1999, the applicant was ordered to active duty in
an AGR status.  She was on temporary duty from 22 August through 3
September 1999 to attend AGR entry training with a reporting date of 13
September 1999 to the 326th Finance Group, Bell, CA for assignment to a
CPT’s position.

3.  By memorandum dated 26 April 2001, the applicant was promoted to CPT
with a DOR of 18 April 2000.

4.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from
the Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, USAHRC – STL.  That office
noted that the applicant had been selected for promotion by the 2000
Department of the Army Reserve Components Selection Board with a PED of 30
September 2001 based on 5 years TIG as a 1LT.  She was promoted with a DOR
of           20 March 2001, the date the board was approved.  Under ROPMA,
her DOR was adjusted to 18 April 2000.  Under the ROPMA project, 1LTs who
served 5 years TIG and were selected for promotion upon their first
consideration for promotion to CPT by the 2000 Selection Board were
eligible to have their DOR adjusted to the date they would have received
had they been selected for promotion based on 4 years TIG.

5.  The advisory opinion went on to state that, if the applicant had been
selected for promotion by the 1999 selection board based on 4 years TIG,
she would have been promoted with a DOR of 18 April 2000, the approval
date of the 1999 board.

6.  A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for
comment or rebuttal.  She did not respond within the given time frame.

7.  Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant
Officers other than General Officers), Update Number 23 dated 1 September
1994, paragraph 4-19d stated AGR officers would be promoted effective on
their PED provided they were attached to a position in the higher grade.
An AGR officer who was not attached to a position in the higher grade would
be promoted effective on the date of reattachment to a higher graded
position or the day after release from AGR status.

8.  Army Regulation 135-155, Update Number 23 dated 1 September 1994,
paragraph 4-19e stated officers selected by a mandatory board could have a
PED that was prior to the adjourning date of the board.  The officer’s
effective date would be the adjourning date of the board by which
recommended.  The member’s PED became the DOR.  At the time (pre-ROPMA),
the TIG requirement for promotion to CPT was 4 years.

9.  Army Regulation 135-155, effective 2 November 2001, paragraph 4-21
stated that in no case would the DOR or the effective date of promotion be
earlier than the date the board is approved.  Paragraph 4-21d stated that
AGR officers selected by a mandatory board would be promoted provided they
were assigned/attached to a position in the higher grade.  An AGR officer
who was selected for promotion by a mandatory promotion board, who was not
assigned/attached to a position in the higher grade, would be promoted on
the date of assignment/attachment to a higher graded position or the day
after release from AGR status.  The DOR would be the date the officer
attained maximum TIG or the date on which assigned/attached to a position
in the higher grade, whichever was earlier.  (The current regulation,
effective 13 August 2004, reads the same.)  At this time (post-ROPMA), the
TIG requirement for promotion to CPT is 5 years.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant quoted the governing regulation in effect at the time
correctly. AGR officers would be promoted effective on their PED provided
they were attached to a position in the higher grade.  The PED will then
become the DOR.  However, the applicant confused the term “PED” with
“assignment to position.”

2.  Pre-ROPMA, the applicant’s PED to CPT would have been upon completing
3 years TIG as a 2LT and 4 years as a 1LT.  Since she was commissioned on
19 January 1994, her PED to CPT would have been 18 January 2001.  Post-
ROPMA, her PED to CPT would have been upon completing 2 years TIG as a
2LT and 5 years as a 1LT.  Again, her PED to CPT would have been 18 January
2001.

3.  The enactment of ROPMA on 1 October 1996 created a pool of officers
whose 1LT and CPT TIG requirements fell outside of the previous 3 year and
   4 year rules and the new 2 year and 5 year rules.  The applicant was one
of those officers.  Instead of being promoted to CPT on her normal PED of
         18 January 2001 due to selection by the 2000 promotion board, a
ROPMA DOR adjustment project determined that she would have been considered
by the 1999 promotion selection board, which would have resulted in her
promotion to CPT on 18 April 2000, the date the results of the 1999 board
were approved.

4.  It was not until Army Regulation 135-155 was revised effective 2
November 2001 that an AGR officer could have a DOR of the date on which he
or she was assigned/attached to a position in the higher grade.  Even so,
in no case would the DOR or the effective date of promotion be earlier than
the date the promotion board is approved.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__mjt___  __cad___  __eem___  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.




                                  __Marla J. Troup______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050017802                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060926                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |131.05                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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