RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  22 April 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070012064 


	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.




Director



Analyst

      The following members, a quorum, were present:


M

Chairperson

M

Member

M

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 correction of his date of rank (DOR) to lieutenant colonel (LTC)/O-5 from 24 March 2005 to 15 September 2003 or a date to be determined by the Board based on the evidence provided.

2.  The applicant states that his current DOR is unjust because it took a long time to be promoted once he was transferred to a LTC/O-5 position.

3.  The applicant provided the following additional documentary evidence in support of his application:

	a.  Self-authored letter, dated 16 August 2007.

	b.  List of dates and events causing unnecessary delay in the promotion process.  

	c.  Illinois Army and Air National Guard, Springfield, Illinois, Memorandum, dated 3 September 2003, Results of the Officer Centralized Personnel Management System (OCPMS) Selection Board.  

	d.  Department of Military Affairs, State of Illinois, Springfield, Illinois, Orders 268-134, dated 25 September 2003, Reassignment Order.  

	e.  National Guard Bureau Special Orders Number 40 AR, dated 23 February 2004, extension of Federal recognition in the Army National Guard (ARNG) due to change of state from Illinois to the Virgin Islands.  

	f.  U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC)-St. Louis, Missouri, Memorandum, dated 19 February 2004, Eligibility for Promotion as a Reserve Commissioned Officer Not on Active Duty.  

	g.  Headquarters, U.S. Army Signal Center and Fort Gordon, Fort Gordon, Georgia, Memorandum, dated 22 October 2004, Request for Award of Functional Area of Concentration FA 53.  

	h.  Joint Force Headquarters, Virgin Island, Virgin Islands National Guard (VIARNG) St. Croix, Virgin Islands, Memorandum, dated 25 January 2005, Award of Area of Concentration (AOC), Secondary AOC, Special Qualification Identifier and Additional Skill Identifier of 53 (A).  

	i.  National Guard Bureau Special Orders Number 96 AR, dated 24 March 2005, extension of Federal recognition in the ARNG due to promotion to LTC.

	j.  Joint Force Headquarters Virgin Islands, Christiansted, Virgin Islands, Orders 273-507, dated 30 September 2005, Change of Duty Assignment Orders.   
	k.  Extract of Joint Force Headquarters Virgin Islands Table of Distribution and Allowances (TDA).

	l.  Extract of Security Clearance Investigation and Adjudication History, dated 20 July 2007.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  With prior enlisted service, the applicant was appointed in the Illinois Army National Guard (ILARNG) as an infantry commissioned officer on 14 June 1986 and executed an oath of office on 23 July 1986.  He was promoted to first lieutenant (1LT)/O-2 on 13 June 1989, to captain (CPT)/O-3 on 24 September 1991, and to major (MAJ)/O-4 on 4 June 1997.  He completed the Command and General Staff Officer Course on 25 June 2002 and the Signal Officer Advance Course on 31 October 2003. 

2.  On 3 September 2003, by memorandum, Illinois Army and Air National Guard, Springfield, Illinois, notified the applicant that he was selected for promotion within the State of Illinois, effective 15 September 2003, by the Officer Centralized Personnel Management System (OCPMS) Selection Board that convened in Springfield, Illinois, on 3 September 2003.

3.  On 25 September 2003, Department of Military Affairs, State of Illinois, Springfield, Illinois, published Orders 268-134, reassigning the applicant from his position as a Telecommunications Systems Officer [25A (Signal)] into the position of Supervisor, Data Processing Division [53A (Information Systems Management)], effective 15 September 2003.  

4.  On an unknown date in 2003, the applicant requested an inter-state transfer to the VIARNG.  The facts and circumstances surrounding his transfer from the ILARNG to the VIARNG are not available for review with this case; however, on 12 January 2004, Joint Force Headquarters Virgin Islands, Christiansted, Virgin Islands, published Orders 7-3, assigning the applicant to the position of Deputy Chief of Staff, Information Management, within the Headquarters, VIARNG, a MAJ/O-4 position.  He executed a National Guard oath of office on the same date.
5.  On 20 January 2004, Department of Military Affairs, State of Illinois, Springfield, Illinois, published Orders 020-219, transferring the applicant from his position as a Supervisor, Data Processing Division, ILARNG, Springfield, Illinois, to the position of Deputy Chief of Staff for Information Management (53A position), VIARNG, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, effective 12 January 2004. 

6.  On 19 February 2004, by memorandum, HRC-St. Louis, Missouri, notified the applicant of his eligibility for promotion as a Reserve commissioned officer not on active duty due to his selection for promotion to LTC/O-5 under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-155 by a Board that convened on 3 September 2003, adjourned on 19 September 2003, and was approved on 26 January 2004.  This memorandum also informed him that the effective date of promotion would be either of the following dates:

      a.  3 June 2004; or  

	b.  date Federal recognition is extended in the higher grade; or   

	c.  date following the date Federal recognition is terminated in the current grade. 

7.  On 23 February 2004, National Guard Bureau published Federal recognition Special Orders Number 40 AR confirming the applicant’s transfer from the ILARNG to the VIARNG, effective 12 January 2004. 

8.  On 26 April 2004, the applicant completed the requirements for and was awarded primary AOC 92A (Quartermaster General) and secondary AOC 25A (Signal General), in accordance with Army Regulation 611-21 (Military Occupational Classification and Structure).

9.  On 14 June 2004, by memorandum addressed to the Adjutant General, VIARNG, the applicant requested to delay his promotion as a Reserve of the Army and Army National Guard officer until 2 June 2007, in accordance with National Guard Regulation 600-100 (Commissioned Officers-Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions).  In his request, the applicant acknowledged that by delaying this promotion:

      a.  his name would be retained on the promotion list for the maximum period authorized;  

	b.  he would be promoted into a higher grade if a higher grade position was made to him;   
	c.  he would accept promotion in the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) if there was no higher grade position available to him and he desired to be promoted;

	d.  he would decline his promotion which would result in the removal of his name from the promotion list and he would appear before his next mandatory board for his competitive category; and

      e.  at the end of the approved period of delay, should he not select an option, NGB would withdraw his Federal recognition and he would transfer to the IRR for promotion.  

10.  On 14 June 2004, by memorandum, Joint Forces Headquarters, VIARNG, approved the applicant’s request for a delay in promotion and forwarded the action to the U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Center (now known as HRC), St. Louis, Missouri.   

11.  On 22 October 2004, by memorandum, Headquarters, U.S. Army Signal Center and Fort Gordon, Fort Gordon, Georgia, notified the applicant’s higher headquarters in the VIARNG that his (the applicant's) request for award of 
AOC 53 (Information Systems Management) constructive credit was approved in accordance with Department of the Army Pamphlet 600-3 (Commissioned Officer Development and Career Management).

12.  Officer Personnel Management (OPMS) XXI restructured the Army officers by grouping interrelated branches and functional areas into officer management categories called Career Fields.  The Career Field designation process determines in which specialty officers will continue their field grade development; either in their branch or in their functional area.  

	a.  A branch is a grouping of officers that comprises an arm or service of the Army and is the specialty in which all officers are commissioned or transferred, trained, and developed. 

	b.  A functional area (FA) is a grouping of officers by a career field other than an arm, service, or branch possessing an interrelated grouping of tasks and skills that may require significant education, and training.  Functional area service requires knowledge ranging from math, computers, and science to public speaking and foreign policy. 


	c.  Both branches and functional areas may require more specific job skills and qualifications to further prepare their officers to meet highly specialized position requirements.  These specific skills are called areas of concentration (AOC).

13.  On 17 December 2004, by memorandum, the Chief, Personnel Policy Branch, National Guard Bureau, Arlington, Virginia, notified the applicant that his request for FA/AOC 53 was approved.

14.  On 25 January 2005, by memorandum, Joint Forces Headquarters, VIARNG, Christiansted, St. Croix, Virgin Islands, notified the applicant that he met the requirements for award of FA/AOC 53 (Information Systems Management). 

15.  On 3 February 2005, Joint Forces Headquarters, VIARNG, Christiansted, St. Croix, published Oder 034-501, announcing the applicant’s promotion to LTC/O-5 with an effective date and DOR of 11 January 2005.

16.  On 16 March 2005, the applicant was issued a certificate of clearance and/or security determination granting him an Interim Secret clearance. 

17.  On 21 March 2005, by memorandum, Headquarters, VIARNG, Christiansted, Virgin Islands, notified the applicant that the Calendar Year (CY) 2005 Selection Retention Board adjourned and selected him for retention in the ARNG under the provisions of National Guard Regulation 635-102 (Commissioned and Warrant Officers Assigned To Selective Service Sections State Area Commands). 

18.  On 24 March 2005, National Guard Bureau published Special Orders Number 96 AR, extending the applicant Federal recognition for promotion to LTC/O-5 effective 24 March 2005.

19.  In his self-authored statement, the applicant restated his request to adjust his DOR for promotion from MAJ/O-4 to LTC/O-5 and believes an injustice occurred because his promotion took longer than normal.  He asked the Board to approve an earlier DOR, preferably 15 September 2003, or 22 October 2004, based on bona fide qualification, or other date as deemed appropriate.  He further stated that he understood there would be no monetary gain provided if the Board decides to grant his request and the change in DOR would speed up his eligibility for promotion to COL/O-6.  He also provided a list of dates and events that he stated caused unnecessary delays in his promotion process.


20.  In his list of dates and events that led to what he described as unnecessary delays in the promotion process, the applicant restated that he was transferred from the ILARNG to the VIARNG on 12 January 2004 and received constructive credit for FA/AOC 53 on 22 October 2004.  He focused on his 18 December 2002 update for security clearance that was cancelled on 5 October 2004 due to his transfer from ILARNG to VIARNG and that a new security clearance questionnaire was submitted on 15 February 2005. 

21.  The applicant submitted an extract of his security clearance investigation and adjudication history which shows that he applied for a security clearance and initiated his Electronic Personnel Security Questionnaire (EPSQ) on 28 March 2005.  However, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) terminated his investigation on 5 October 2004, presumably due to his inter-state transfer.  He resubmitted a new EPSQ on 15 February 2005 and a new investigation was reinitiated on 28 March 2005.  He was granted a Secret clearance on 25 February 2007. 

22.  In an advisory opinion obtained in the processing of this case on 13 February 2008, the Chief, Personnel Division, National Guard Bureau, Arlington, Virginia, recommended approval of adjusting the applicant’s DOR from 24 March 2005 to 22 October 2004, based on the applicant’s approved request for award of AOC 53A effective 22 October 2004.  The Chief further stated that chapter 8 of National Guard Regulation 600-100 states that for an officer to be promoted, the officer must be on the Reserve Active Status List (RASL).  Promotions are based on efficiency, time in grade (TIG), time in service (TIS), military and civilian education, military occupational specialty (MOS) qualified for the position in which they are being promoted to, demonstrated command and staff ability, and have passed an Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) within the time prescribed.

23.  On 19 February 2007, the applicant was furnished a copy of the advisory opinion.  Being deployed, he responded with an electronic mail (email) on the same date, indicating that he concurs with the advisory opinion. 

24.  National Guard Regulation 600-100 prescribes policies and procedures governing the appointment, assignment, temporary Federal recognition, reassignment, transfers between States, promotions, branch transfers. attachments and separations of commissioned officers of the Army National Guard.  Chapter 8 of this regulation prescribes promotion policy and criteria.  It states, in pertinent part, that promotion of commissioned officers in the ARNG is a function of the State.  A commissioned officer promoted by State authorities has a State status in the higher grade under which to function.  However, to be extended Federal recognition in the higher grade, the officer must have satisfied the requirements.  The effective date of promotion of an ARNG commissioned 
officer who is promoted in the State is the date the Chief, National Guard Bureau 
extends Federal recognition.  The DOR as a Reserve of the Army is determined by the commissioned officer's duty status, type of selection board which selected the officer, and delay status (if applicable).  The DOR as a Reserve of the Army for an ARNG commissioned officer who is promoted as a result of Federal recognition board selection is the date Federal recognition is extended in the higher grade.  The DOR as a Reserve of the Army for an ARNG commissioned officer who is promoted as a result of selection by a mandatory selection board, is the date the Chief, National Guard Bureau extends Federal recognition.

25.  The commissioned officer must be on the RASL.  The RASL is a single list of commissioned officers who are active participating members of the ARNG and USAR, including those in the IRR.  The RASL ranks officers within each grade and competitive category.  Promotion criteria is based on efficiency, time in grade, demonstrated command and staff ability, military and civilian education, and potential for service in the next higher grade.  Promotion would be accomplished only when the officer is assigned to an appropriate vacancy in the higher grade in the unit.  The commissioned officer must remain the same vacancy in which he or she has been recommended for promotion until Federal recognition orders are published. 

26.  To be considered for Federal recognition and subsequent Reserve of the Army promotion following State promotion to fill a vacancy, an ARNG commissioned officer must be and remain in an active status until Federal recognition in the higher grade is extended, be medically fit, meets the height and weight standards, have completed the minimum years time in grade, have completed the minimum military and civilian education requirements, and have passed the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). 

27.  National Guard Bureau, Arlington, Virginia, Memorandum, dated 16 December 2003, subject: Army National Guard (ARNG) Promotion Process for Commissioned Officers, provides guidance to The Adjutants General (TAG) on the procedures for requesting Federal recognition of first lieutenant, DA Mandatory Board Selected Officers, and unit vacancy promotions of commissioned officers.  The intent is to streamline this process, and reduce and standardize hard copy document requirements.  The memorandum states, in pertinent part, that effective 1 December 2003, officers must be qualified in the Functional Area/Area of Concentration required for the position.  It also states that the officer must have, at a minimum, a current secret security clearance.  An interim clearance is acceptable provided a reinvestigation has been initiated.
28.  Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) prescribes the policies and procedures for the promotion of Reserve warrant officers.  Paragraph 4-15b of this regulation states that the effective date of promotion for commissioned officers may not precede the date on which the promotion memorandum is issued.  The promotion memorandum cannot be issued before the date the promotion board results are approved and confirmed by the Senate (if required).  In addition, the officer must already be assigned/attached to a position in the higher grade or, if an IRR/IMA officer selected by a mandatory promotion board, have completed the maximum years of service in grade in the current grade. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that he is entitled to correction of his DOR for promotion to LTC from 24 March 2005 to 15 September 2003 or 22 October 2004. 

2.  The applicant was selected for promotion to LTC/O-5 by a mandatory selection board that convened on 3 September 2003, adjourned on 19 September 2003, and was approved on 26 January 2004.  He was notified of this selection on 19 February 2004.  However, prior to this notification, he voluntarily transferred from the ILARNG to the VIARNG on 12 January 2004. This transfer, in effect, terminated his security investigation.

3.  However, had he not moved from the ILARNG to the VIARNG, he would have been granted an Interim clearance upon assuming a similar position in the ILARNG, as evidenced by the fact that upon submitting his new security questionnaire on 15 February 2005, he was granted an Interim clearance shortly thereafter, on 15 March 2005. 

4.  Evidence of record shows upon assignment to his new position in the VIARNG on 12 January 2004, the applicant was not qualified in AOC 53.  After a review of his request for FA/AOC 53 constructive credit, the Director, Office of the Chief of Signal, Fort Gordon, Georgia, certified the applicant as qualified in that AOC on 22 October 2004.  

5.  In view of the foregoing, it appears that the earliest date the applicant was fully qualified for promotion to LTC/O-5 was 22 October 2004, and as such, he is entitled to correction of his records to show his effective date of promotion to LTC/O-5, and in effect, his DOR, to show 22 October 2004.


BOARD VOTE:

__x__  __x___  __x___  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  amending VIARNG Element, Joint Force Headquarters Order 034-501, dated 3 February 2005 to show his effective date/date of rank to LTC/O-5 as
22 October 2004;

	b.  amending Army National Guard Special Order Number 96 AR, dated 24 March 2005 to show Federal recognition for promotion to LTC/O-5 effective 22 October 2004, and

	c.  payment of back pay and allowances based on the corrected effective date of promotion to LTC/O-5.



							RML
      ______________________
                CHAIRPERSON


ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20070012064



10


DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
1901 SOUTH BELL STREET, 2ND FLOOR
ARLINGTON, VA  22202-4508