RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        19 September 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060003975


      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. Victoria A. Donaldson        |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James E. Anderholm            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Maribeth Love                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Thomas M. Ray                 |     |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 his National Guard Federal
Recognition order (initial appointment), dated 20 June 2005, in the grade
of first lieutenant be corrected to show the effective date 12 May 2004.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the National Guard was unaware of
the fact that officers participating in the Early Commissioning Program did
not have to complete an Officer Basic Course prior to promotion.  The
applicant continues that he was a member of the United States Army Reserve
(USAR) assigned to the Officer Active Duty Obligor program and therefore
assumed that the USAR was the promotion authority.  The applicant continues
that the USAR issued promotion orders for the grade of first lieutenant but
later rescinded those orders because the applicant was a member of the Army
National Guard.

3.  The applicant argues that the Nevada Army National Guard (NVARNG)
submitted a request to the Chief of the National Guard for award of
permanent Federal Recognition as a first lieutenant and that the promotion
packet was erroneously sent back due to the fact that he had not completed
an officer basic course.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of Army National Guard Regulation 135-155
(Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officer Other General
Officers), DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), DA Form 71 (Oath of Office),
Military Education Waiver Memorandum, NVARNG Congressional Response Letter,
NGB Form 337 (Oath of Office), NGB Form 62E (Application for Federal
Recognition as an Army National Guard Office or Warrant Officer and
Appointment as a Reserve Commissioned Officer or Warrant Officer of the
Army in the Army National Guard of the United States), Officer Evaluation
Report , NVARNG Orders Number 111-011, Texas Army National Guard Orders
Number 151-1057, NVARNG Orders Number 273-004, Reserve Officer Promotion
memorandum, a page from the SIDPERS database, National Guard Federal
Recognition Orders Number 187AR, and National Guard Federal Recognition
Orders Number 194AR in support of this application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Records show that the applicant served as an enlisted Soldier in the
USAR during the period 20 December 2000 through 12 May 2002.  On 13 May
2002, the applicant executed an Oath of Office as a Reserved Commissioned
Officer in the grade of second lieutenant.

2.  On 14 May 2002, the applicant executed an Oath of Office in the TXARNG
and was granted temporary Federal Recognition as a second lieutenant.

3.  TXARNG Orders Number 151-1057, dated 31 May 2002, appointed the
applicant as a second lieutenant in the TXARNG effective 14 May 2002.

4.  National Guard Bureau Federal Recognition Orders Number 194 AR, dated
17 July 2002, show that the applicant was transferred from the USAR and
awarded permanent Federal Recognition in the grade of second lieutenant,
effective 14 May 2002.

5.  Records show that, on 19 August 2003, the applicant was notified by the
Adjutant General's Department of the TXARNG that his records did not
indicate he had completed an Officer Basic Course and/or the required
Civilian Education for promotion to the next higher grade.  The applicant
was also informed that it was his responsibility to ensure that the data
was accurate.

6.  On 13 July 2004, the applicant was notified by the US Army Human
Resources Command that he was promoted to the grade of second lieutenant as
a Reserve Commissioned Officer of the Army effective 31 May 2004.

7.  The applicant's records contain a copy of the 13 July 2004 US Army
Human Resources Command promotion letter.  This copy contains the word
"VOID."

8.  The applicant's records contain a DA Form 4187 wherein the applicant
requested a transfer to the NVARNG from the TXARNG.  The authorizing
commander approved the applicant's request on 25 August 2004.

9.  NVARNG Orders Number 273-004, dated 29 September 2004, appointed the
applicant as a second lieutenant effective 29 September 2004.

10.  On 29 September 2004, the applicant executed an Oath of Office as a
second lieutenant in the NVARNG.

11.  National Guard Bureau Federal Recognition Orders Number 300 AR, dated
3 December 2004, awarded the applicant permanent Federal Recognition for a
change of state from the TXARNG to the NVARNG.  These orders further show
the applicant's rank as second lieutenant and the effective date 29
September 2004.



12.  NVARNG Orders Number 111-011, dated 21 April 2005, revoked NVARNG
Orders Number 088-006, dated 29 March 2005, which promoted the applicant to
the grade of first lieutenant.  NVARNG Orders Number 088-006, dated 29
March 2005, are not available for review with this case.

13. NVARNG Orders Number 168-003, dated 17 June 2005, promoted the
applicant to the grade of first lieutenant effective 29 March 2005.

14.  National Guard Bureau Memorandum, dated 20 June 2005, notified the
applicant of his promotion to the grade of first lieutenant as a Reserve
Commissioned Officer of the Army effective 29 March 2005.

15.  National Guard Bureau Federal Recognition Orders Number 187 AR, dated
20 June 2005, awarded the applicant permanent Federal Recognition for
promotion to the grade of first lieutenant effective 29 March 2005.

16.  The applicant successfully completed the Signal Officer Basic Course
on 26 August 2005.

17.  The applicant provided a copy of a 7 July 2005, letter to the
Congressional Representative from the State of Nevada from the Adjutant
General of the State of Nevada.  The Adjutant General of the State of
Nevada stated that the applicant accepted appointment as a second
lieutenant in the TXARNG on 14 May 2002 and that upon his appointment he
was removed from the roles of the USAR-Officer Active Duty Obligor Program.

18.  The Adjutant General of the State of Nevada continued that as a result
of his removal from the roles of the USAR-Officer Active Duty Obligor
Program, the US Human Resources Command removed applicant's name from the
2004 Army Reserve Component Selection Board promotion list.

19.  The Adjutant General of the State of Nevada stated that, in accordance
with the provisions of Army Regulation 135-155, an officer must be assigned
to or under the administrative control of the USAR Control Group to be
eligible for promotion under the provisions of the Officer Active Duty
Obligor Program.

20.  The Chief of Personnel Division, National Guard Bureau provided a
three-page advisory opinion for consideration with this case.  The Chief,
of Personnel Division recommended that the applicant's request be denied
for the following reasons:

      a.  the Officer Active Duty Obligor Program only applies to officers
in the USAR,

      b.  the applicant's promotion in the USAR was revoked due to the fact
that he had transferred to the TXARNG at the time of the promotion, and

      c.  the response by the Adjutant General of the State of Nevada.

21.  The applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion for review
and comment.  To date, the applicant has not responded.

22.  The Adjutant General of the State of Nevada argued that officer
promotions were not an entitlement, nor are they automatic and that the
commander of the officer's unit of assignment must recommend promotion.  He
continues that the applicant's commander recommended him for promotion in
March 2005, the state held a Federal Recognition Board, a state promotion
order was promulgated on 29 March 2005 and the applicant's promotion packet
was forwarded to the National Guard Bureau for Federal Recognition.

23.  The Adjutant General of the State of Nevada contends that officials at
the National Guard Bureau erroneously retired the applicant's promotion
packet without action due to lack of military education which was contrary
to the findings of the State Federal Recognition Board.

24.  The Adjutant General of the State of Nevada concluded that the
applicant was awarded permanent Federal Recognition for promotion as a
first lieutenant on 29 March 2005.

25.  Paragraph 2-1 of Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned
Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) states, in
pertinent part, that an officer in the grade of second lieutenant will be
considered for promotion without review by a selection board.  The
officer's records will be screened to determined eligibility for promotion
to the next higher grade far enough in advance to permit promotion on the
date the promotion service is completed in compliance with table 2-1 or
table 2-3 of this regulation.

26.  Table 2-1 of Army Regulation 135-155 states that the minimum time in
grade as a second lieutenant for promotion to first lieutenant is 2 years.

27.  Table 2-2 of Army Regulation 135-155 states, in pertinent part, that
second lieutenants must complete a resident officer basic course to be
eligible for promotion to first lieutenant.
28.  National Guard Regulation 600-100 (Commissioned Officer-Federal
Recognition and Related Personnel Actions), chapter 8 states that promotion
authority for all Army National Guard officers is the State Adjutant
General.  If the Adjutant General chooses not to promote an officer, he or
she is not obligated to do so.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his promotion to the grade of first
lieutenant was delayed because the NGB failed to follow the appropriate
regulation.

2.  Records show that the applicant was a member of the USAR and
participated in the Officer Active Duty Obligor Program.  However, he
transferred to the TXARNG prior to being promoted to the grade of first
lieutenant and was no longer eligible for promotion under the USAR-Active
Duty Obligor Program criteria.

3.  The Adjutant General of the State of Nevada clearly stated that the
applicant was not recommended for promotion to the grade of first
lieutenant until March 2005.

4.  Although, NGB erroneously returned the applicant's promotion packet for
failure to complete the required education requirements, the applicant was
subsequently awarded permanent Federal Recognition for promotion to the
grade of first lieutenant effective 29 March 2005 which is the same date
that he would have been giving on the first request.

5.  There is no evidence in the available records and the applicant has not
submitted sufficient evidence showing that his promotion to the grade of
first lieutenant was unfairly delayed or that his immediate commander
recommended him for promotion earlier than March 2005.  Absent evidence to
show that there was a manifest error in the promotion and/or Federal
Recognition, there is no basis to grant the relief requested.









BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__JEA___  _TMR___  __MBL __  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. Anderholm___
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060003975                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060919                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)          |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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