RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        28 March 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060001682


      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.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Barbara J. Ellis              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Larry J. Olson                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Ronald D. Gant                |     |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 that his date of rank and date of appointment be
adjusted to 28 August 2004.

2.  The applicant states that, prior to his commissioning in August 2004,
he was told he could not be appointed in the Medical Service Corps.  He was
told he would be appointed in the Signal Corps.  However, he received two
conflicting sets of orders.

3.  The applicant provides his college transcripts; pages 1 – 3 of a 4-page
    NGB Form 62-E (Application for Federal Recognition as an Army National
Guard Officer or Warrant Officer and Appointment as a Reserve Commissioned
Officer or Warrant Officer of the Army in the Army National Guard of the
United States) dated 13 May 2004; an Officer Candidate School (OCS)
certificate of completion; Department of Military Affairs, State of
Illinois Orders 343-271 dated 8 December 2004; a corrected copy of
Department of Military Affairs, State of Illinois Orders 343-271 dated 8
December 2004; an NGB Form 89 (Proceedings of a Federal Recognition
Examining Board) dated 6 March 2005; page 4 of an NGB Form   62-E dated
March 2005; an NGB Form 337 (Oaths of Office) dated 6 March 2005;
Department of Military Affairs, State of Illinois Orders 069-125 dated
    10 March 2005; Department of Military Affairs, State of Illinois Orders
069-126 dated 10 March 2005; National Guard Bureau Special Orders Number
112 AR dated 12 April 2005; and a U. S. Army Human Resources Command – St.
Louis appointment memorandum dated 31 May 2005.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  After having had prior enlisted service in the Army National Guard
(ARNG), the applicant completed State OCS in August 2004.  The certificate
of completion is dated 29 August 2004.

2.  The State of Illinois informed the Board analyst the applicant appeared
before a Federal Recognition board in August 2004 for appointment as a
Medical Service Corps officer.  The National Guard Bureau (NGB) denied the
applicant Federal Recognition because OCS graduates could not be appointed
as Medical Service Corps officers.

3.  Department of Military Affairs, State of Illinois Orders 343-271 dated
             8 December 2004 discharged the applicant from the ARNG and as
a Reserve of the Army as an enlisted Soldier and appointed him a second
lieutenant, Medical Service Corps, in the ARNG effective 29 August 2004.  A
corrected copy of these orders appointed him a second lieutenant, Signal
Corps, in the ARNG effective 29 August 2004.

4.  The State of Illinois informed the Board analyst that NGB informed them
the State could not correct the applicant's initial board and the applicant
had to go before another Federal Recognition board.

5.  The NGB Form 89 dated 6 March 2005 indicated the applicant's
examination was completed on that date and he was found to meet the
requirements for appointment under the provisions of National Guard
Regulation (NGR) 600-100 as a Signal Corps officer.  He was extended
temporary Federal Recognition effective 6 March 2005.

6.  Page 1 of the NGB Form 89 dated 6 March 2005 stated in part the board
was convened pursuant to paragraph 10-7 of National Guard Regulation 600-
100 and Headquarters, State of Illinois Adjutant General Federal
Recognition Board Appointment Memorandum dated 21 January 2005 (emphasis
added).

7.  Page 2 of the NGB Form 89 dated 6 March 2005 stated in part "I certify
that I have reviewed the proceedings of this board and find that they are
in order, administratively correct and complete.  This board was conducted
IAW Chapter 10, NGR 600-100 and the current Memorandum of Instruction (MOI)
to the Army National Guard Federal Recognition Board by the Secretary of
the Army, dated  7 Jan 05… " (emphasis added).

8.  The applicant took the oath of office of a National Guard officer on 6
March 2005.  Department of Military Affairs, State of Illinois Orders 069-
125 dated          10 March 2005 revoked the 8 December 2004 orders
appointing him a commissioned officer effective 29 August 2004 (apparently
both the original and the corrected copy).

9.  Department of Military Affairs, State of Illinois Orders 069-126 dated
10 March 2005 appointed the applicant a second lieutenant, Signal Corps, in
the ARNG effective 6 March 2005.

10.  National Guard Bureau Special Orders Number 112 AR dated 12 April 2005
extended Federal Recognition to the applicant effective 6 March 2005.

11.  U. S. Army Human Resources Command – St. Louis appointed the applicant
as a Reserve Commissioned Officer of the Army effective 6 March 2005.

12.  In the processing of the case, an advisory opinion was obtained from
the Personnel Division, NGB.  That office noted in part that "Proceedings
of a Federal recognition examining board dated 21 January 2005, was
reviewed and approved on 7 January 2005."  It noted the effective date of
Federal recognition for original appointment is that date on which the
commissioned officer executes the Oath of Office in the State.  A search of
the applicant's official files failed to locate an NGB Form 337 dated 28
August 2004.  That office did determine that the applicant should have been
appointed on 7 January 2005 due to the board results being reviewed and
approved on that date and recommended his initial appointment be adjusted
to 7 January 2005.

13.  A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for
comment or rebuttal.  He did not respond within the given time frame.

14.  NGR 600-100 (Commissioned Officers – Federal Recognition and Related
Personnel Actions) provides procedures for processing all applications for
Federal Recognition.  Paragraph 2-1 states that commissioned officers of
the ARNG are appointed by the several States under Article 1, Section 8 of
the U. S. Constitution.  These appointments may be federally recognized by
the Chief, NGB under such regulations as the Secretary of the Army may
prescribe and under the provisions of this regulation.  Officers who are
federally recognized in a particular grade and branch shall be tendered an
appointment in the same grade as Reserve commissioned officers of the Army
with assignment to the Army National Guard of the United States if they
have not already accepted such appointment.

15.  NGR 600-100, paragraph 2-2 states that the effective date of Federal
Recognition for original appointment is that date on which the commissioned
officer executes the oath of office in the State.  Paragraph 2-3a states
that temporary Federal recognition upon initial appointment establishes the
authorized grade to be used by all officers in their federally recognized
status.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The State of Illinois informed the Board analyst that the applicant
appeared before a Federal Recognition board in August 2004.  It is
acknowledged that an Oath of Office for that period is not available;
however, since the State of Illinois forwarded his Federal Recognition
packet to NGB, presumably the State had the applicant execute an oath of
office prior to forwarding the packet.

2.  Because the applicant was ineligible for appointment as a Medical
Service Corps officer, NGB denied the applicant Federal Recognition and
required he appear before another Federal Recognition board.

3.  The applicant next appeared before a Federal Recognition board on 6
March 2005.

4.  The advisory opinion had noted that "Proceedings of a Federal
recognition examining board dated 21 January 2005, was reviewed and
approved on            7 January 2005."  However, 21 January 2005 was the
date of the State of Illinois Adjutant General memorandum appointing the
board and 7 January 2005 was the date of the current MOI to the Army
National Guard Federal Recognition Board by the Secretary of the Army.

5.  The applicant executed the oath of office of a National Guard officer
on          6 March 2005.  New orders were issued appointing him a second
lieutenant, Signal Corps, in the ARNG effective 6 March 2005.  The National
Guard Bureau extended Federal Recognition to him effective 6 March 2005 and
the U. S. Army Human Resources Command – St. Louis appointed him as a
Reserve Commissioned Officer of the Army effective 6 March 2005.

6.  Nevertheless, the advisory opinion recommended the applicant's initial
appointment be adjusted to 7 January 2005 as "the board results were
reviewed and approved on that date."  Although the advisory opinion's
recommended date is based on an erroneous reading of the NGB Form 89, the
logic behind their recommendation is reasonable.

7.  Since a preponderance of the evidence strongly suggests the applicant
did or should have executed his oath of office on 29 August 2004, the date
it appears he was initially granted temporary Federal Recognition, it would
be equitable to correct his date of appointment to 29 August 2004.

8.  The applicant requested his date of appointment be corrected to 28
August 2004.  There is no evidence of record to suggest he was granted
temporary Federal Recognition by the State of Illinois on 28 August 2004.
The date might have been a typographical error on the part of the
applicant.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

__bje___  __ljo___  __rdg___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board
recommends that the state Army National Guard records and all Department of
the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing he was
granted Federal Recognition effective 29 August 2004 and that he was
appointed as a Reserve of the Army effective 29 August 2004.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
correcting his records to show he was appointed on 28 August 2004.




                                  __Barbara J. Ellis____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060001682                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060328                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schneider                           |
|ISSUES         1.       |102.01                                  |
|2.                      |125.02                                  |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]