MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  7 September 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR1999028784

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Vic Whitney		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas B. Redfern		Member	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That her Date of Rank (DOR) to lieutenant colonel (LTC) be corrected from 5 September 1998 to 5 May 1998.

APPLICANT STATES:  That she was on the Army Medical Department (AMEDD), Reserve Component, LTC promotion list that was released on 5 May 1998.  She was later informed that she could not be promoted on that date because she did not have an updated security clearance.  She was eventually promoted effective 5 September 1998 when security reinvestigations were suspended due to budget constraints.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

At the time of the 1997 Reserve Component LTC AMEDD Selection Board, she was serving in the grade of major, with a date of rank of 2 October 1991, in the National AMEDD Augmentation Detachment (NAAD).  A memorandum from her unit shows that she was serving in a captain’s position, authorized by Army Regulation 140-10 to be occupied by an officer one grade lower or two grades higher.  Her maximum years of service in grade for promotion consideration was 7 years as a major, or 1 October 1998.

The promotion board results were approved on 28 March 1998 and released on 5 May 1998.  On 16 December 1998 the Army Reserve Personnel Command (AR-PERSCOM) issued a promotion notification memorandum for the applicant.  It shows that her promotion to LTC was effective 4 September 1998 with the same date of rank.

In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the            AR-PERSCOM.  The opinion notes that the applicant was issued her security clearance on 6 November 1979 and, in accordance with Army Regulation 380-67, her security clearance expired effective 5 November 1994, 15 years from the date of issue.  The opinion also states, in effect, that in accordance with Title 10, USC, section 14311(b), officers who do not meet all of the qualifications for promotion will have their promotion delayed until the date that all qualifications are met.

Also noted in the AR-PERSCOM opinion was receipt of a message on 4 September 1998, which suspended reinvestigations of security clearances effective 25 September 1998.  Based on this message, AR-PERSCOM issued promotion orders on all affected officers whose promotions had been suspended for reinvestigation of security clearances.  These promotion orders directed an effective date of promotion and date of rank of 4 September 1998, the date notification was received.

The applicant provided a rebuttal to the advisory opinion.  She states that in 1995 (no date specified) she submitted the paperwork to have her security clearance update accomplished.  She thought it had been accomplished and did not know why it was not.  The fact that her security clearance was not submitted for reinvestigation was through no fault of her own and she was caught in the middle of bureaucratic inefficiency and inadequate knowledge of policies.  She believes that she met all the requirements for promotion and her effective DOR should be the promotion board release date of 5 May 1998.

Telephonic contact with the Training Branch of the NAAD by a member of the staff of the Board revealed that the applicant had been reassigned to the Individual Ready Reserve effective 25 February 2000.  There were no records on the applicant at the NAAD and no information available to indicate when she might have completed the requirement to update her security clearance information.  Additionally, a data base check of the Central Clearance Facility failed to show any updated security clearance information since her clearance was initially issued on 6 November 1979.

Title 10, USC, section 14311(b), provides for the delay of promotion for lack of qualifications.  If the Secretary concerned determines that the officer was unqualified for promotion during any such delay the Secretary may adjust such date of rank, effective date of pay and allowances, and position on the Reserve active-status list as the Secretary considers appropriate.

Army Regulation 380-67, as amended, provides the policy for the Personnel Security Program.  It requires a DOD National Agency Check with written inquires (DNACI) for a Secret clearance reinvestigation.  Proper completion of all required documentation (DD Forms 1879, 2221, and 398-2) with a favorably accomplished local records check can result in authorization by the commander of the Central Clearance Facility to grant an interim Secret clearance.

Army Regulation 135-155 provides the policy for promotion of Reserve Component officers.  Paragraph 4-10 outlines the requirements for promotion after selection, which includes security screening.  Inherent in the security screening process is the requirement for all commissioned officers to hold a valid secret security clearance.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion, it is concluded:

1.  There is no evidence of record, and none provided by the applicant, that she submitted a proper and complete reinvestigation package to have her security clearance updated after it expired on 5 November 1994.  Her delay in promotion to lieutenant colonel, until 4 September 1998, conforms to law and regulation in effect at the time.

2.  Implicit in the Army's promotion system is the universally accepted principle that officers have a responsibility for their own careers.  The general requirements and workings of the system are widely known and specific details such as selection board dates, eligibility requirements and promotion zones are widely published in official and quasi-official publications and official communications.  Given that the applicant’s security clearance expired in November 1994 and she knew, or should have known, that she must have it updated prior to the 1997 promotion board, her statement that she was not aware of the status for 3 years lacks merit.

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__ca___  ___tr__  __wm___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999028784	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000907	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.05	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.