Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008945
Original file (20080008945.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  18 December 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080008945 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that his date of rank to captain (CPT)/O-3 of 20 January 2006 be adjusted to that of his commissioning peer group.

2.  The applicant states that he began the process of joining the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) in 2002 and he received a direct commission as a first lieutenant (1LT) in the Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps on 13 March 2003 with a date of rank of 13 March 2002.  He states that when he received his commission in the Reserve, JAG officers received their promotions from 1LT to CPT through a Promotion Vacancy Board (PVB).  Active duty JAG officers were promoted to CPT within a few months of their commission.  Every JAG officer was slotted in a CPT/O-3 position, so once his or her packet was submitted his or her promotion was close to being automatic.

3.  He states that he had met the educational requirement for promotion in December 2003.  He has prior enlisted service and he is a graduate of the Airborne and Ranger schools and has served with active and Reserve special operations units.  He was serving in a CPT's slot and, although there is no way to know whether he would have been promoted, by the preponderance of the evidence he would have been promoted.

4.  He states that while he was preparing his PVB packet in late December 2003, he felt compelled to volunteer for service in Iraq.  He volunteered to serve with the U.S. Army Special Forces Command with the Special Forces Group (Airborne) in Iraq.  When he volunteered to go to Iraq he was told by his unit that he could no longer go before a PVB because if he did, the Board's results would not be back in time for him to get promoted before he deployed and he could not get a PVB promotion while on active duty.  Therefore, they would not submit his PVB packet because it was a waste of time.

5.  He states that his peers who did not deploy were promoted to CPT while he served in Najaf in the summer of 2004.  The choice was deploy or stay home, and he chose to deploy.  Upon returning from Iraq he went before a mandatory promotion board and it took 1 year for the Board to convene and release the results for his promotion, which was 2 years after his peers were promoted.  His peers were promoted by the PVB and the Army has since fixed the flaw and now all Reserve direct-commission JAG officers are promoted to CPT as soon as they have sufficient time in grade (TIG) and are educationally qualified, which is normally 1 year after commissioning, which for him would have been 13 March 2004.

6.  He concludes that his current peer group for his rank is people who were commissioned 2 years after he was commissioned.  They had 2 years less time in service and had only a year in the Army and no experience when they were promoted to CPT.  He fell through the crack and nothing has been done to fix the injustice.  By changing his date of rank, he would be able to compete for promotion with his year group and his career would be back on track where it should have been all along.

7.  The applicant provides a copy of a statement, biographical summary, appointment memorandum, promotion orders, mobilization orders, and officer evaluation reports.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's military records show he was appointed in the USAR JAG Corps as a 1LT effective 13 March 2003 with a date of rank of 13 March 2002.

2.  The applicant was issued orders, dated 26 April 2004, for deployment for 179 days in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom effective 2 May 2004 with a projected end date of 27 October 2004.

3.  He was released from active duty and transferred to the 174th Judge Advocate Detachment, Legal Service Team, Armed Forces, Orlando, Florida, effective 26 October 2004.

4.  In a memorandum from the Office of the Assistant Secretary, Manpower and Reserve Affairs, dated 17 December 2003, it is stated that all Reserve Component officers in the Individual Ready Reserve and Selected Reserve who are mobilized and on a Reserve Active Status List and on an approved mandatory selection board promotion list may be eligible for promotion under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, sections 12301(a), 12302, 12304, and 14308(a).  The memorandum is not applicable to non-mobilized or mobilized Reserve Component officers selected for promotion by PVBs convened under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, sections 14101(a)(2) and 14315.

5.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Human Resources Command (HRC), St. Louis, Missouri.  The HRC stated that the applicant was appointed as a 1LT in the USAR on 13 March 2003.  The applicant did not meet the criteria for promotion to CPT in accordance with Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers), which states that the applicant must be on the Reserve Active Status List for 1 year and have served for 2 years in the lower grade to be eligible for promotion consideration to CPT.  The applicant did not meet the requirements by December 2003.  The applicant's date of rank was adjusted from 13 March 2003 to 13 March 2002, due to 1 year overage of constructive service credit.  Therefore, his mandatory promotion eligibility date was 13 March 2007.

6.  The HRC further states that based on the applicant's date of rank of 13 March 2002, the applicant was selected on 7 November 2005 and promoted to CPT by the Fiscal Year 2005 Department of the Army Reserve Components Selection Board on 20 January 2006.  Therefore, the applicant is not eligible for an earlier date of rank.  The HRC recommended disapproval of the applicant's request.  The advisory opinion, dated 28 August 2008, was forwarded to the applicant for a rebuttal.

7.  On 8 October 2008, the applicant responded via electronic mail addressed to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records staff that he does not disagree with the advisory opinion except for the recommendation.  He states that the advisory opinion fails to address his argument, in effect, eligibility for a vacancy promotion.  He repeated his contention that other officers were given vacancy promotions ahead of him while he was deployed even though he was the most qualified.  The applicant repeated his contention that he was unfairly denied unit vacancy promotion consideration due to his deployment to Iraq.

8.  Army Regulation 135-155 prescribes the policies and procedures for the promotion of Reserve Component officers.  The regulation specifies that officers in the grade of 1LT may be eligible for promotion consideration to captain by a PVB upon completion of 2 years minimum TIG.  Promotion to fill authorized troop program unit (TPU) position vacancies may be filled through promotion of the best qualified and geographically available officer to the grades of CPT through colonel.  All TPU officers in the next lower grade must have met the minimum TIG for promotion to the next higher grade and be geographically available to serve in the position for which considered.  The existence of a valid position will be determined by counting certain officers against the strength authorized.  The area commander will ensure that the intent of the position vacancy fill procedures have been complied with before proceeding with PVB promotion consideration.

9.  Army Regulation 135-155 also specifies that a 1LT will receive mandatory promotion consideration for promotion to CPT upon completion of 5 years in the lower grade.

10.  Army Regulation 135-155, paragraph 4-21a, states, "The effective date and date of promotion, to include 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 meets maximum TIG, whichever is later."

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his date of rank of 20 January 2006 to CPT should be adjusted to that of his commissioning peer group.

2.  The evidence shows that the applicant was deployed to Iraq and was not available to serve in a TPU if selected by a PVB.

3.  The applicant has not shown denial of PVB promotion because of his deployment.  However, even if he did it would not constitute an error or injustice.  To promote an officer against a unit vacancy while that officer is deployed would deprive the commander of a member of his or her professional staff until the officer comes off active duty.  Furthermore, the applicant was aware that his choice to deploy would result, ultimately, in a delay in his promotion to CPT.  He made an informed choice and must live with the consequences.

4.  As such, the applicant was properly considered and selected for promotion to CPT by a mandatory promotion board.

5.  It is noted that the applicant served his country during a very critical time of need; however, given the circumstances he was not eligible for a vacancy promotion to CPT.

6.  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

___X____  ___X____  ___X___  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.



      ___________X______________
                 CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080008945



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080008945



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

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 | CY2006 | 20060010097

    Original file (20060010097.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, promotion reconsideration to captain (CPT) by a Position Vacancy Board (PVB). In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the Office of Promotion, Reserve Components, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), St. Louis, Missouri, dated 10 August 2006, indicating that the applicant was considered on the 2006 Position Vacancy Board which convened on 28 March 2006. Promotion to fill authorized troop program unit (TPU) position...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001055C070205

    Original file (20060001055C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    While in the GSU, he applied for a promotion to captain via the January 2004 Position Vacancy Board (PVB) for a vacant captain Administrative Law Officer position. Prior to the processing of his promotion, it was determined that when the applicant's promotion packet was submitted for consideration, a position vacancy did not exist for the applicant to fill in order for him to be promoted. Since there is no authorization for promotion to the next higher grade based on filling a position...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013057

    Original file (20070013057.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states that he was selected for promotion to CPT by the November 2004 Mandatory Promotion Board and attained the maximum time in grade (TIG) as a first lieutenant (1LT) on 1 April 2005. Memorandum, Department of the Army, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, dated 10 March 2005, stated that officers recommended for promotion by mandatory promotion boards will be promoted on the date they attain maximum TIG or upon assignment to a higher grade unit position, whichever is...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060016197

    Original file (20060016197.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    This order shows, in pertinent part, that the applicant was promoted to the grade of rank of CPT, effective and with a DOR of 1 March 2005. The applicant adds, in effect, that the Reserve Support Command should be able to confirm another person was assigned as the MP Platoon Leader and that he was assigned as the Operations Officer (i.e., a captain's position) from 16 July 2001 through 9 February 2003. Chief, Office of Promotions, RC, USA HRC, St. Louis, Missouri, effect necessary action...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014921

    Original file (20080014921.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 March 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080014921 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states that he became eligible for LTC on 17 July 2007 when he had 4-years time in grade (TIG) in accordance with Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers). While the applicant states that he was never notified of the PVB suspense, he has not provided any evidence to substantiate that contention.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018452

    Original file (20070018452.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the completion of 2 years minimum time in grade (TIG), his promotion eligibility date (PED) for captain was 28 September 2002, upon consideration and selection by a position vacancy board (PVB). In an advisory opinion, dated 12 February 2008, the Chief, Special Actions, DA Promotions, HRC, St. Louis, stated, that the applicant was considered and selected for promotion to captain by the 2004 RCSB, with a civilian education waiver. It is concluded that since the applicant could not...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015404

    Original file (20080015404.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that someone from the Promotion Vacancy Board (PVB) removed his promotion packet from consideration because he was being considered by a mandatory promotion board as a below the zone (BZ) officer. The available evidence shows the applicant was erroneously not considered by a PVB for promotion to LTC. If an officer is erroneously not considered by a PVB, the position for which he is applying is filled by another officer.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010991

    Original file (20060010991.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    x The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Department of the Army, HRC-STL Orders B-03-601825, dated 7 March 2006, promoted the applicant to the rank of CPT with an effective date and DOR of 20 January 2006. The advisory opinion states the applicant was selected for promotion to CPT by the 2005 Department of the Army Reserve Components Selection Board, and the board was approved on 20 January 2006.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001273

    Original file (20120001273.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the required completion of 5 years TIG, his promotion eligibility for CPT by a mandatory promotion board is 13 March 2013. The regulation states ARNG officers will be considered for promotion by mandatory promotion boards, and promotion to CPT required completion of 5 years of maximum TIG as a first lieutenant. The evidence of record shows the applicant was appointed in the MDARNG as a 1LT effective 13 March 2009 with an adjusted DOR of 13 March 2008.