MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  1 November 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2001059600

	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. Paul A. Petty		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		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 his lieutenant colonel (LTC) promotion orders, dated 9 May 2000, be amended to change his date of rank (DOR) from 12 April 2000 to 1 May 1999.

APPLICANT STATES:  According to Title 10, section 14304, the maximum time-in-grade (TIG) for promotion from captain (CPT) to major (MAJ) is 7 years.  He was promoted to CPT on 1 May 1985 and MAJ on 22 May 1993.  This totals 
8 years and 21 days TIG for CPT.  He requests his DOR for MAJ be changed from 22 May 1993 to 1 May 1992, 7 years from promotion to CPT, and that his DOR for LTC be changed from 12 April 2000 to 1 May 1999.

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

That he was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the Army Reserve on 
23 May 1981.  He was called on active duty on 25 September 1981.  On 1 May 1985, he was promoted to CPT with a DOR of 1 May 1985.  On 30 September 1992, he was released from active duty and transferred to the U. S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement).  On or about 8 February 1993, he was assigned to a Reserve Troop Program Unit, Headquarters, 926th Engineer Group.  He was placed on Active Guard Reserve (AGR) duty on 27 August 1995.

He was considered and selected for promotion to MAJ by the 1994 Army Reserve Components Selection Board.  He was promoted to MAJ, effective 
1 March 1995, with a DOR of 22 May 1993.  These actions occurred prior to the 1 October 1996 implementation of the Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act (ROPMA) as provided, in part, in Title 10, U. S. Code, section 14304.

The applicant was promoted to MAJ under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-155 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve, Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers), in effect at the time. Paragraph 4-15 stated that an officer’s DOR is his promotion eligibility date (PED), the date that the officer meets the eligibility criteria for promotion to the next higher grade.  The officer must meet the mandatory service requirements as stated in tables 2-1 and 2-1.1.  Table 2-1 shows that for promotion to MAJ, the required TIG as a CPT is 7 years and the required time in service is 12 years total.  For the applicant, 7 years TIG as a CPT was 30 April 1982, and 12 years time in service was 22 May 1993.

ROPMA was implemented on 1 October 1996.  ROPMA, as stated in Title 10, 
U. S. Code, provides in pertinent part, that a MAJ would be eligible for consideration for promotion to LTC at a maximum of 7 years of service in grade as a MAJ.  For the applicant, 7 years service in grade or TIG as a MAJ was 
21 May 2000.  This date is called the PPED (Prospective Promotion Eligibility 

Date).  An officer will be considered by a promotion board far enough in advance of completing maximum years of service in grade, the PPED, so that if the officer is recommended for promotion, the promotion may be effective on or before the date on which the officer will complete those years in service.  Promotion cannot be before the date that the promotion board recommendations are approved.  Promotion can be before the PPED if the officer is serving in a position in the next higher grade on the date that the promotion board recommendations are approved.

The applicant was considered for promotion to LTC by the 1999 LTC Army Reserve Mandatory Promotion Board which convened on 8 September 1999.  The board adjourned on 8 October 1999 and its recommendations were approved on 12 April 2000.  The applicant was serving in a position authorized a LTC as an Engineer Organization Integrator in Headquarters, United States Army Reserve Command, Fort McPherson, Georgia.  He was promoted to LTC on 
12 April 2000 with a DOR of 12 April 2000.

The Office of Promotions, Reserve Component, U. S. Total Army Personnel Command, St. Louis, provided an advisory opinion that the applicant’s DOR and effective date for CPT, MAJ, and LTC are correct in accordance with the applicable regulations and ROPMA.  The applicant was provided an opportunity to rebut the advisory opinion.  He did not respond within the established suspense.

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(s), it is concluded:

1.  That the applicant’s DOR and promotion effective date for CPT and MAJ are correct and in accordance with Army Regulation 135-155 in effect at the time.  These promotions occurred prior to the implementation of ROPMA and are not subject to the provisions of ROPMA.

2.  That the applicant’s DOR and promotion effective date for LTC, 12 April 2000, are correct and in accordance with ROPMA and Title 10, U. S. Code, in effect at the time.

3.  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

__wm___  ___cg___  __ao____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001059600	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20011101	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	102.07 – Date of Rank	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.