RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:      14 November 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060004784


      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. Curtis L. Greenway            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Thomas M. Ray                 |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Peguine M. Taylor             |     |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, an adjustment to her date of rank
for major to 1 October 1998 and correction to her promotion eligibility
date (PED) for lieutenant colonel to 1 October 2005.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that her date of rank for major should
be adjusted by one year.  She also states that she was promoted to major in
the United States Army Reserve (USAR) 9 years after her initial promotion
to captain in the USAR.  She states that this was due to an administrative
error in St. Louis and beyond her control.  Her promotion letter to captain
shows a date of rank of
2 October 1991 and an effective date of 15 April 1992.  She was promoted to
major in the USAR, 8 years after the earlier date on 3 January 2000. This
means that her date of rank as a major is 1 year later than the law and
regulations require.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of her promotion memorandum for captain
in support of her application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's military records show she was appointed in the USAR, as
a second lieutenant, effective 4 October 1984, with prior enlisted service.
 She was promoted to first lieutenant effective 3 October 1987.

2.  The applicant was promoted to captain with an effective date of 15
April 1992 and a date of rank of 2 October 1991.

3.  The applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to major by
the 1998 Reserve Components Selection Board (RCSB) that convened on
24 March 1998.

4.  The applicant was considered and selected for promotion to major by the
1999 RCSB that convened on 2 March and recessed on 2 April 1999.  The
President approved the board results on 3 January 2000.

5.  The applicant was promoted to major with a promotion effective date and
date of rank of 3 January 2000.  Based on the completion of the required 7
years maximum time in grade, her PED for lieutenant colonel is 2 January
2007.



6.  In an advisory opinion, dated 11 May 2006, the Chief, Special Actions,
Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Human Resources Command, St.
Louis, Missouri, stated that the applicant was promoted to first lieutenant
on 3 October 1987 with a PED of 2 October 1991.  The applicant was
considered by the 1991 RCSB and selected.  She was given 2 October 1991 as
her date of rank and an effective date of 15 April 1992, the date she
transferred from a troop program unit into the Individual Ready Reserve.
Her PED for major was 1 October 1998.  The applicant was considered and not
selected for promotion to major by the 1998 RCSB.  The next year she was
considered by the 1999 RCSB and selected.  That board convened on 2 March
and recessed on 2 April 1999.  The applicant was given a date of rank of 3
January 2000, the date the board was approved.  This is the earliest date
she could be given for the 1999 board.  The applicant is asking for a date
of rank for major of 1 October 1998.  She was non-selected by the 1998
RCSB; therefore, she can not have a date earlier than the convene[sic] date
of the board from which she was selected.

7.  The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for her
acknowledgement or rebuttal on 24 August 2006.  She did not respond.

8.  The Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act (ROPMA), a public law
enacted by Congress on 5 October 1994, prescribed policies and procedures
to consolidate and modernize the laws governing the management of Reserve
Component officers.  ROPMA was implemented on 1 October 1996, and it
established that the MYIG for a captain is 7 years and that an officer
selected for promotion to major the first time he/she is considered will be
promoted on or before the date that he/she completes the MYIG.  Troop
program unit officers must be serving in a position requiring the higher
grade or assigned to the Individual Ready Reserve or an Individual
Mobilization Augmentee position.  Promotion cannot be effective prior to
approval of respective boards by the President.

9.  Army Regulation 135-155 prescribes the policies and procedures for the
promotion of Reserve officers.  This regulation specifies that the
promotion of an officer selected after having been failed of selection on a
first mandatory consideration cannot be earlier than the approval date of
the second mandatory board by which the officer is considered.  The
effective date and date of promotion (date of rank) will be no earlier than
the approval date of the board, the date of Senate confirmation (if
required), or the date the officer meets the maximum time in grade,
whichever is later for non-unit officers.

10.  Army Regulation 135-155, also specifies that the effective date and
date of promotion (date of rank) for unit officers recommended on a second
or subsequent mandatory board, will be no earlier than the approval date of
the board, the date of Senate confirmation (if required), or the date the
officer is assigned to the position, whichever is later.  The date of rank
is the date the officer actually was promoted to a specific grade and will
be used to establish time in grade requirements to the next grade.

11.  Army Regulation 135-155, further specifies a major serve a maximum of
7 years time in grade before promotion to lieutenant colonel.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not
entitled to a correction to her date of rank for major to 1 October 1998.
She has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief she now
requests.

2.  The applicant's contention that her date of rank should be adjusted by
one year is noted.  However, the applicant was considered and not selected
for promotion to major by the 1998 RCSB, which was her first mandatory
board.  She was considered and selected for promotion to major by the 1999
RCSB, which was her second mandatory board.  The 1999 RCSB was approved on
3 January 2000.  Therefore, her promotion effective date and date of rank
cannot be earlier than the approval date of the second mandatory board.

3.  Based on the requirement of completion of 7 years maximum time in grade
as a major, the applicant is not entitled to correction to her PED for
lieutenant colonel to 1 October 2005.

4.  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

_TMR ___  ___CSG_  __PMT__  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.




                                  ______________________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060004784                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061114                                |
|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]