Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011062
Original file (20060011062.txt) Auto-classification: Denied


RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  19 April 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060011062 


	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.  




	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 his records be corrected to reverse the denial of his request for an exception to policy to execute a Judge Advocate Continuation Pay (JACP) contract.

2.  The applicant states that he served 4 ½ years of active duty in the Judge Advocate General Corps (JAGC) and was eligible for the JACP at that time.  However, he opted to be released from active duty for financial reasons.

3.  Two months and 10 days later, he voluntarily reentered active duty.  He took this action due to the attacks against the United States on September 11 and has remained on active duty since that time.

4.  In late 2002, he was diagnosed with two forms of cancer, which precluded him from being reassessed on regular active duty.  Since then his cancers have both gone into remission and he has been reassessed on regular active duty.

5.  The applicant contends that if it had not been for his cancers, he would have been successful into being reassessed on regular active duty and would have been eligible for the JACP.

6.  The applicant provides his request for an exception to policy regarding JAGC dated 27 December 2005; the denial of that request by the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary (Manpower and Reserve Affairs); and the transcript from a message from the Personnel, Plans, and Training Office, Office of The Judge Advocate General.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s records show that he was commissioned as a JAGC officer and entered active duty on 20 January 1997.  He was honorably released from active duty as a captain on 24 July 2001 for miscellaneous/general reasons.

2.  The applicant was ordered to active duty pursuant to the Presidential Partial Mobilization order on 3 October 2001.  He served continuously as a Reservist on active duty under several active duty orders.  He was promoted to major on 26 August 2004.  He was honorably released from active duty in the rank of major on 26 July 2006 by reason of completion of required active service.

3.  The applicant reentered active duty on 11 August 2006.  These orders specified that he was being ordered to 10 months of active duty, but those orders were amended to read 3 years of active duty.  The authority cited on these orders was Title 10 US Code, Section 12301.

4.  The applicant requested an exception to policy to execute a JAGC contract on 27 December 2005.  In an undated memorandum the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) denied the applicant’s request.  That denial was forwarded to the applicant by the Chief, Personnel, Plans, and Training Office, Office of The Judge Advocate General.  In the forwarding correspondence it was stated that the applicant’s request fell outside the scope of the JAGC program.

5.  The transcript from a message from the Personnel, Plans, and Training Office, Office of The Judge Advocate General, contains the implementation instructions for the legislative authority in 37 USC 321, as promulgated by the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force Management Policy).

6.  In those instructions, it specified that effective 1 October 2005, the following judge advocates were eligible for the new JACP:  Probationary Regular Army (RA) captains upon completion of their initial active duty service obligation; nonprobationary RA captains during their sixth year of active commissioned service; and RA officers upon completion of 10 years of service on the active duty list (ADL) as a judge advocate.  This message adds that judge advocates on the ADL, who were then pending transition to the RA, were treated as RA officers for the purpose of this policy.

7.  This message also contains a list of categories which are not eligible for JACP.  One of those is officers who were selected for voluntary indefinite status but declined the opportunity to apply for JACP.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant, by his own admission, was eligible for JACP when he was released from active duty on 24 July 2001.  Since he declined JACP at that time, he was specifically prohibited from receiving JACP under the new incentive.

2.  The JACP requested by the applicant is an incentive for, primarily, RA captains.  However, it does contain provisions to provide this incentive to Other Than RA (OTRA) JAGC officers who are on the ADL who were transitioning to the RA.  The applicant was not an RA captain and was not on the ADL pending transition to the RA.  As such, he was not entitled to the JACP.

3.  While it is unfortunate that the applicant’s decision to separate from active duty on 24 July 2001 precluded him from receiving the new JACP, that fact does not constitute an injustice that would warrant an exception to policy.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___jgh___  ____jns__  ____dkh_  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.





_________John N. Slone_________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060011062
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070419
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004655C070205

    Original file (20060004655C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a memorandum, dated 4 April 2006, the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, requested to eliminate the mandatory captain promotion selection board for AR JAGC officers in the Army Reserve Active Guard Reserve (AGR) JAGC and the Army Reserve Non-AGR JAGC competitive categories. He states that under the provisions of Title 10, USC, section 14101(a)(3) and section 14308(b)(4), the Secretary of the Army has the authority to authorize that in lieu...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017051

    Original file (20070017051.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests promotion to major (MAJ)/O-4 in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), effective 20 May 2007, based on his earlier selection for promotion to that grade prior to his separation from the Regular Army on 30 April 2007. The applicant’s records show that he was selected for promotion. Army Regulation 135-155 also states, in pertinent part, that an active duty officer, who is selected for promotion but removed from the ADL and placed in an active Reserve status prior to promotion,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016938

    Original file (20080016938.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that he has as much time on active duty as his Regular Army (RA), Judge Advocate General's Corps (JAGC) classmates at the officer basic course (OBC). Yet, the RA officers were given constructive service credit and appointed to captain. The applicant states that his DOR should be adjusted because he has as much time on active duty as his RA classmates at the JAGC OBC.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025271

    Original file (20100025271.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that he be granted constructive credit for 3 years of law school in computing his date of rank (DOR) to captain (CPT). Under the provisions of DODI 1312.03, paragraph 6.1.1.3., and Army Regulation 135-100, paragraph 12a(3), an officer will receive 1 year of prior commissioned service credit for each year of commissioned service in an active status, except for time spent in an active status while in law school. Section 533(f)(2) provides that a Reserve officer not on...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077976C070215

    Original file (2002077976C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    As a result, he will have only one OER as a MAJ in his records when he is considered for promotion to LTC. Army Regulation Army Regulation 600-8-29 (Officer Promotions) prescribes the officer promotion function of the military personnel system. Thus, the Board finds that it would be appropriate to adjust the applicant’s DOR to 16 January 2001, which would account for his time on the TDRL and allow him the time to prove himself as a MAJ and gain the experience necessary to compete for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110017564

    Original file (20110017564.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The entry grade and DOR or promotion service credit in grade of a commissioned officer shall be determined by the entry-grade credit awarded upon appointment. Synthesizing the requirements of Title 10, U.S. Code, section 533, and DODI 1312.03 in determining his entry grade upon his original appointment in the RA on 30 August 2010, PP&TO and HRC were required to calculate and award the sum of his commissioned service in an active status and his CSC for law school. The evidence of record...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071365C070402

    Original file (2002071365C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He submits a statement explaining the promotion board's mistake, his request for correction of his DOR, denial of his request by a Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) official, the PERSCOM order determining his DOR, a copy of an Officer Record Brief (ORB) dated 26 November 2001 and orders showing his promotion to captain. On 22 January 2002, a PERSCOM official of the Promotion Branch DOR Section denied the applicant's request for correction of his first lieutenant DOR. Based on his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090382C070212

    Original file (2003090382C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Title 10, U. S. Code, section 14304 states that officers shall be placed in the promotion zone for that officer’s grade and competitive category and shall be considered for promotion to the next higher grade by a promotion board far enough in advance of completing the years of service in grade specified so that, if the officer is recommended for promotion, the promotion may be effective on or before the date on which the officer will complete those years of service. He was subsequently...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120008471

    Original file (20120008471.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel provides: * 1994 retirement DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * 2008 release from active duty DD Form 214 * extracts of Title 10, U.S. Code (USC), sections 501, 502, 505, 506, 207, 688, and 688a * letters from the Assistant Secretary of Defense to the Chairman of the Committee on Armed Forces * Department of Defense (DOD) report on a study regarding promotion eligibility of retired officers recalled to active duty * memorandum from the Assistant...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021913

    Original file (20100021913.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's adjusted DOR of 22 October 1995 for 1LT made him eligible for promotion consideration under the criteria of the 18 April 1999 CPT APL promotion selection board. The 1998 CPT APL Promotion Selection Board reviewed DOR's prior to 16 May 1995. The change in policy for promotions of USAR JAGC from 1LT to CPT was not effective until 1 October 2006, 6 years after his promotion to CPT.