RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        22 August 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050017822


      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. Linda D. Simmons              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Jerome L. Pionk               |     |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, that her promotion date to first
lieutenant (1LT) be backdated.

2.  The applicant states she has been waiting for 5 years to have a flag
removed from her records.  She was commissioned in May 1999.  In 2000, she
applied for a top secret clearance and was denied.  Her secret clearance
was also revoked. She was informed that in 2 years she would be able to get
the flag lifted and reapply for a secret clearance.  She has since
reapplied, but there is no record of her application.  She believes she has
been punished unfairly and her career is at a standstill.

3.  The applicant provides a letter, dated 28 April 2005, requesting
reinstatement of her security clearance.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant served on active duty with the Regular Army from 4
October 1991 through 20 June 1994.  She was transferred to the U. S. Army
Reserve (USAR) to complete her obligation.  She was granted a secret
security clearance on 6 October 1997.

2.  The applicant was commissioned a second lieutenant (2LT) in the USAR on
13 May 1999.  She was assigned to the 356th Military Intelligence (MI)
Company, Forest Park, GA on 22 September 1999.  She completed the MI
Officer Basic Course in July 2000.

3.  A Defense Security Service file dated 19 May 2001 shows a National
Agency Check was conducted that resulted in mostly favorable results, but
which also resulted in an unfavorable credit bureau check.  Apparently as a
result of this unfavorable credit check, the applicant was denied SCI
(Sensitive Compartmented Information) eligibility in June 2002.
Apparently, her secret security clearance was also revoked at that time.

4.  On 1 September 2002, the applicant was transferred to the USAR Control
Group (Reinforcement).  On 30 January 2003, she was transferred to
Headquarters, U. S. Army Forces Command.  On 20 February 2003, she was
transferred back to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement), apparently as a
result of her security clearance problem.  On 29 May 2003, she was
transferred to her present unit.

5.  On 23 November 2003, the applicant applied for reinstatement of her
security clearance.  On 19 January 2004, she signed an Authority for
Release of Information and Records authorizing a records check, which was
verified by her brigade security manager on 20 January 2004.  On 28 April
2005, she submitted a memorandum requesting reinstatement of eligibility
for access to SCI and a security clearance.

6.  Effective 27 October 2005, the applicant was promoted to 1LT.  On 11
August 2006, her unit informed the Board analyst that the applicant had
been flagged for adverse action and she should not have been flagged.  When
the flag was lifted, they submitted her promotion paperwork.

7.  As of 14 July 2006 the applicant’s request for reinstatement had not
been acted upon/received by the Central Clearance Facility.

8.  Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant
Officers other than General Officers) states an officer in the grade of 2LT
will be considered for promotion without review by a selection board.  The
officer’s records will be screened to determine eligibility for promotion
far enough in advance to permit promotion on the date promotion service is
completed (2 years time in grade as a 2LT for promotion to 1LT).  Among
other requirements, promotion authorities will ensure that a favorable
security screening is completed before announcing a promotion.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was commissioned as a 2LT in the USAR on 13 May 1999.
She would normally have been eligible for promotion to 1LT on 12 May 2001.
The available evidence shows she had a secret security clearance at that
time (indicating a favorable security screening); however, it also appears
that a National Agency Check was in the final stages of completion at that
time.  A Defense Security Service file dated 19 May 2001 shows a National
Agency Check was conducted that resulted in an unfavorable credit bureau
check.  It appears that the unfavorable credit bureau check prevented her
promotion in May 2001.

2.  There is evidence of record to show the applicant initiated a request
for reinstatement of her security clearance in November 2003.  It appears
this request was acted upon by her brigade security manager in January
2004.  However, as of 14 July 2006 her request for reinstatement had not
been acted upon/received by the Central Clearance Facility.

3.  It cannot be determined if the applicant was actually eligible for
promotion to 1LT in October 2005.  Her unit did not inform the Board
analyst that the applicant had met the favorable security screening
requirement.

4.  While the Board is sympathetic with the problem the applicant is having
in getting her request for reinstatement of her clearance acted upon, it
cannot arbitrarily show that she had a favorable security screening
effective a specific date.  Her problem with getting her clearance
reinstated should be resolved through her security manager and/or the
Inspector General before any adjustment of her date of rank to 1LT could be
reconsidered.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__lds___  __jtm___  __jlp___  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.




                                  __Linda D. Simmons____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050017822                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060822                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |131.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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