IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 18 August 2011
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100023903
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 correction of his date of rank (DOR) for promotion to lieutenant colonel (LTC) from 28 July 2010 to 17 January 2009.
2. The applicant states he was selected by the 2008 LTC selection board and he occupied a higher-graded position, but was not promoted due to grade control issues. He states he received orders to Iraq effective 31 January 2010 and he was promoted to the rank of LTC effective 28 July 2010, but should have been promoted on 17 January 2009 in accordance with Deployed T10 Officer Promotion Guidance, dated 1 July 2007.
3. The applicant provides a list of supporting documents in his application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the Virginia Army National Guard (VAARNG) on 1 April 1991. He was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant on 14 December 1992 and to the rank of captain on 19 January 1995.
2. On 1 March 1999, he was honorably discharged from the VAARNG and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve. On 27 July 2000, he again accepted a commission in the VAARNG in the rank of captain.
3. He was promoted to the rank of major effective 23 January 2004 with a DOR of 18 January 2002.
4. He was ordered to active duty in the Active Guard Reserve (AGR) Program on 1 November 2003 and he deployed to Iraq on 29 January 2010. On 19 May 2010, he submitted a request to the VAARNG requesting promotion to the rank of LTC.
5. He was promoted to the rank of LTC on 29 July 2010 and departed Iraq on 15 November 2010 for assignment to MacDill Air Force Base, Florida. He was released from active duty on 31 March 2011 due to completion of required active service.
6. In the processing of this case a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the National Guard Bureau (NGB) which recommended that the applicant's request be disapproved. Officials at NGB opine that the memorandum cited by the applicant does not apply to the facts of his case and indicate the applicant was promoted to the rank of LTC well before reaching his maximum time in grade of 23 January 2011. The opinion was coordinated with VAARNG officials who also concur that the applicant is not entitled to an earlier DOR.
7. The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment; however, no response has been received by the staff of the Board to date.
8. NGB memorandum, dated 1 July 2007, subject: Deployed Title 10 AGR Officer Promotion Guidance, provides that Title 10 Army National Guard Soldiers who are not approved by NGB for promotion but are otherwise eligible may be promoted but will forfeit their right to automatically return to the Title 10 AGR Program in the next higher grade. Officers in this category who are promoted may elect (with the State Adjutant General's concurrence) to remain in the Title 32 program upon demobilization and will need to reapply to the Title 10 program at the next higher grade.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's contention that he should have been promoted effective 17 January 2009 instead of 28 July 2010 has been noted and appears to lack merit.
2. Based on information obtained from officials at NGB and VAARNG, it appears the applicant was promoted to the rank of LTC in accordance with the applicable regulations and policies in effect at the time.
3. It is also noted that the applicant did not respond to the advisory opinion nor did he dispute the information contained therein. In the absence of evidence to dispute the information contained in the advisory opinion, there appears to be no basis to grant his request.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
____X___ ____X___ ____X___ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
1. The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
2. The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by him in service to the United States during the Global War on Terrorism. The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.
_____________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) AR20100023903
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100023903
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100027948
In a memorandum for MILPO's, dated 1 September 2004, the NGB stated that the mobilization promotion policy applied to ARNG officers recommended for promotion to the grades of captain through LTC who are mobilized under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, sections 12301(a), 12302 and 12304. The NGB stated there was no AGR LTC position available for him to be promoted into. Evidence indicates the applicant later resigned from the AGR program, accepted an ADOS position, and was promoted to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013779
On 12 January 2006, he was issued Memorandum, Subject: Eligibility for Promotion as a Reserve Commissioned Officer Not on Active Duty Memorandum that notified him he had been selected for promotion under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-155 to LTC by a board that adjourned on 30 September 2005. On 2 July 2012, he submitted a rebuttal wherein he stated: * The NGB omitted a fact that negates their opinion in that at the time of his selection for promotion to MAJ, he was in an AGR...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014403
Because his DOR to MAJ was not annotated on the order announcing Federal recognition, he did not appear before the LTC selection board until 2005 and he was selected for promotion with an effective date of 18 January 2006. c. Because of the error in his DOR for MAJ, his DOR for LTC is also incorrect and should be 30 June 2004. The official noted that his DOR to MAJ was corrected by NGB Special Orders Number 177 AR (Extract) to reflect his maximum time in grade (TIG) as a CPT as required by...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120015137
The evidence of record shows he assumed an LTC position on 1 June 2011; therefore, his DOR should be corrected to that date. The evidence of record shows he was extended Federal recognition effective 27 March 2012; therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his effective date of promotion to an earlier date. As a result, the Board recommends that the State Army National Guard records and the Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending NGB Special...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018392
The applicant requests correction of her records to show the effective date and date of rank (DOR) for her promotion to chief warrant officer two (CW2)/pay grade W-2 was 30 November 2009 (vice 29 April 2010), and payment of all pay and allowances due as a result of this correction. The orders show "Date of Rank: Not applicable" and "Additional instructions: You will not receive pay nor wear insignia in higher grade until federal recognition has been extended by Chief, NGB"; i. NGB,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001473
At the time of his promotion to LTC, his effective date was 11 December 2011, with a DOR of 10 February 2005. The applicant went before the 2007 APL LTC Board and was DA selected for promotion; however, due to control grades for AGR LTC's he was not promoted until December 2011. Officers selected by an SSB are eligible for the same date of rank that they would have received by the original board in which the error occurred.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004378
His record contains a memorandum, subject: Recommendation for Promotion of MAJ (applicant's name), dated 10 February 2012, which contains the following: * under the provisions of chapter 8, National Guard Regulation 600-100 (Commissioned Officers-Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions), recommend the applicant be promoted in the ARNG * in the grade of LTC/O-5, UIC W39LAA, paragraph 052, line 01, Chief, Operations and Training * the officer has demonstrated the required fitness for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013721
Also on the same date, by letter, HRC-St. Louis notified him that he was promoted as a Reserve commissioned officer of the Army to LTC with an effective date of 11 January 2005 and a DOR of 15 April 2004. e. In the applicant's application, he submitted a letter from MG (Retired) V-----, who served as TAG of the State of Massachusetts at the time the applicant was appointed to MAJ in the MAARNG, dated 1 March 2010. Army Regulation 135-155 provides policy for the selection and promotion of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000019
His DOR to CPT should be adjusted to 24 September 2009 as that was the date he was hired to be an Active Guard Reserve (AGR) [in the Alabama Army National Guard (ALARNG)] in the position as battalion training officer, a CPT position. Army Regulation 135-155, table 2-1, states the minimum time in grade for promotion to CPT is 2 years (unit vacancy promotion) and the maximum is 5 years (mandatory promotion). The evidence of record confirms the applicant was promoted to 1LT in the ARNG on 15...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013058
National Guard Regulation 600-100, paragraph 8-15 states in pertinent part that an ARNG commissioned officer, not on active duty, who is selected for promotion as a Reserve commissioned officer of the Army resulting from mandatory consideration may be extended Federal Recognition in the higher grade subject to several conditions, including that the officer has reached his or her promotion eligibility date and that the officer is promoted in a State status to fill an appropriate position...