MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  11 January 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2000037653

	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. Lee Cates		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Ermest M. Willcher		Chairperson	
	Ms. Ann M. Campbell		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr.		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 records be corrected to show her effective date of promotion to master sergeant be the same as her date of rank (DOR).

APPLICANT STATES: That the Colorado Army National Guard (COARNG) received three control grades by the National Guard Bureau (NGB) effective       1 October 1999.  She indicates that she was told that no matter when the command made the decision of the placement of the positions, the promotions would be effective 1 October 1999.  The COARNG did not make this decision until 11 January 2000 and promoted all three effective that date.  She feels she should not be penalized for 5 months pay and allowances because the COARNG drug their feet, since it was not her fault.  She provides a copy of Orders 011-004, State of Colorado, Department of Military Affairs, dated 18 January 2000 with an effective date of 11 January 2000 and a DOR of 1 October 1999.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records were not available.  Information herein was obtained from alternate sources.

The applicant is currently serving in the COARNG in the rank of master sergeant (pay grade E-8).  She was promoted to that rank effective 11 January 2000.

On 1 October 1999, the NGB provided three control grades to the COARNG for one E-9 and two E-8 positions for promotion purposes.

Effective 11 January 2000, after the COARNG determined the placement of the positions, the personnel affected were promoted to the appropriate pay grades.

On 27 November 2000, the Chief, NGB, Human Resources Policy and Programs Division, opined that that the NGB does not become involved in a states process in the reassignment or promotion of personnel and recommends denial of her request.  He also stated “Review of the promotion order reflects a date of rank of 1 October 1999.  Having an effective date of 1 October 1999 would have been in direct violation of the position vacancy required to effect Army National Guard promotions.”

On 6 December 2000, the Chief, NGB opinion was furnished to the applicant for her acknowledgement/rebuttal.  The applicant has not responded.

National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management), dated     1 March 1997, indicates, in pertinent part, that the DOR and the effective date are normally the same.  The effective date cannot be earlier than the first day the soldier becomes fully qualified.  There are no provisions for having the DOR earlier than the effective date.

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.  The evidence of record shows there was no position placement for the applicant to be promoted into until it was established effective 11 January 2000 by the COARNG.  Her contentions have been noted; however, the Board concludes she was properly promoted effective 11 January 2000 and she has not shown otherwise.

2.  It appears that contrary to pertinent regulations, the COARNG gave the benefit to the applicant by allowing her to have a DOR of 1 October 1999 for future promotion purposes, which would make her more competitive with her peers.

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

__ew___  __ac___  ___dh_____ DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000037653	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010111	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.129	DOR/Effective Date 	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.