IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	        28 April 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080016666 


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, in effect, that her date of rank (DOR) for first lieutenant be adjusted.   

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she was commissioned a second lieutenant in March 2008 with 1 year, 10 months, and 9 days of constructive credit for civilian experience.  She contends that the recruiter convinced her to "go ahead and take the commission now" and that she was told "this way it would only be a little over one month" before she would be eligible for promotion to first lieutenant and that her orders would surely state first lieutenant.  She indicates that after receiving her orders and having been assigned, she has been told that she will not be eligible for promotion until after completion of the Officer Basic Course (OBC).  She points out that she took the oath on 18 March 2008 and that she would have been happy to wait until May to be commissioned if it meant appointment as a first lieutenant.  She contends the recruiter stated he had checked with the Army Nurse Corps and had been told she would automatically be promoted.  She states that she waited from March 2008 until the last week of September before she finally received her orders and was able to research her promotion status.  That is when she found out that she would not be promoted to first lieutenant.  She indicates that she is currently working towards her Master degree online and attending OBC would not be feasible until August 2009.  She also states that she would have waited two more months had she been told she would be a second lieutenant for 18 months.   


3.  The applicant provides reassignment orders, a U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Personnel Command Chronological Statement of Retirement Points, promotion orders, a DA Form 5074-1-R (Record of Award of Entry Grade Credit (Health Services Officers)), discharge orders, and a memorandum in support of her application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s DA Form 61 (Application for Appointment) shows she obtained her Bachelor of Science in Nursing degree on 5 May 2007.  

2.  Having prior enlisted service in the Army National Guard, the Regular Army, and the USAR, the applicant was released from the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) on 27 March 2008 for appointment.  She was commissioned a second lieutenant in the USAR, Army Nurse Corps on 28 March 2008 with a DOR of 19 May 2006.    

3.  A DA Form 5074-1-R, dated 29 August 2008, shows that she received 1 year, 10 months, and 9 days of constructive credit for professional experience.  

4.  The applicant was promoted to first lieutenant on 18 May 2008.  

5.  In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Special Actions Branch, Department of the Army Promotions, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri.  The opinion states that time in grade (TIG) for promotion to first lieutenant is two years, that the military education requirement for Army Nurse Corps officers is waived, and that second lieutenant Army Nurse Corps officers have three years to complete OBC.  The opinion points out that on 19 August 2008 the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) established a reduction in the TIG requirement for promotion of Reserve component officers to first lieutenant.  This requirement established second lieutenants on the Reserve active status list the authority to be promoted with a minimum of 18 months TIG and completion of the Basic Officer Leadership Course, if otherwise qualified.    

6.  The advisory opinion indicates that two comparisons were done on the applicant, one under the new policy and the other under the two year TIG ruling.  Since the applicant was appointed prior to the memorandum date of 19 August 2008, and when the special project scroll was initiated, the applicant's name was not on the scroll list approved by the Secretary of Defense, she is not entitled to 


the 18-month policy.  The applicant was promoted under the two year TIG policy and given a DOR of 18 May 2008.  

7.  On 6 January 2009, a copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for comment and possible rebuttal.  The applicant did not respond within the given timeframe.
 
8.  Table 2-1 of Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) states that the minimum time in grade as a second lieutenant for promotion to first lieutenant is 2 years and the maximum time in grade is 42 months.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that her DOR to first lieutenant should be adjusted was carefully considered and determined to be without merit.  
  
2.  Evidence of record shows the applicant was commissioned a second lieutenant in the USAR, Army Nurse Corps, on 28 March 2008 with a DOR of     19 May 2006 and entered active duty that date.  Since the applicant was appointed prior to 19 August 2008 when the special project scroll was initiated the applicant's name was not on the scroll list approved by the Secretary of Defense, she was not entitled to promotion to first lieutenant under the 18-month policy.  The applicant met the TIG requirement for promotion to first lieutenant on 18 May 2008 and orders show she was properly promoted to first lieutenant on that date.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

3.  Even if the applicant had waited until 30 June 2008 to be appointed, and thus received 2 years of entry grade credit, it appears she still would have been promoted to first lieutenant under the two years in grade criteria since the          18 months time in grade criteria was not established until 19 August 2008.

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)                                         AR20080016666



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080016666



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1