PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           24 January 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001059871

	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 Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that his date of rank and effective date of promotion to captain be adjusted to 1 June 2000.

3.  The applicant states that his original date of promotion was 1 June 2000.  However, because he failed the run portion of the May 2000 Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) by 8 seconds, he was flagged and was not eligible for promotion on 1 June 2000.  Since he was then injured and placed on profile, he was not eligible for his next record APFT until 8 November 2000.  He passed, his flag was lifted, and he was promoted to captain with a date of rank and effective date of 8 November 2000.  Then, in April 2001, the APFT track was measured and found to be approximately 60 yards too long, approximately a 25 second difference on the 2-mile run.  Had the track been the proper length in May 2000, he would have passed the run portion, not been flagged, and would have been promoted on 1 June 2000.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was commissioned a second lieutenant on 6 September 1996 and entered active duty on 9 March 1997.

5.  Order Number 139-076, U. S. Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) dated 18 May 2000 promoted the applicant to captain effective 1 June 2000 with a date of rank of 1 June 2000.  Order Number 005-057, PERSCOM dated           5 January 2001 amended these orders to change the effective date and date of rank to read 8 November 2000, apparently as a result of his being flagged for failing the May 2000 APFT. 

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-29 governs the officer promotion function of the military personnel system.  Paragraph 1-21d(2) states that if an officer eligible for promotion fails to pass the most recent APFT or to take and pass the APFT within the period required because of his own fault, then the date of rank and effective date of promotion will be the day the officer passes the APFT.  

7.  The applicant provided a memorandum for record from his company commander substantiating the applicant’s contention that the APFT track was measured in April 2001 and found to be 60 yards too long and that it was reasonable to assume that his run event in May 2000 would have been a passing score had the track been the correct distance.  

8.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Promotions Branch, PERSCOM.  That office recommended denial of the 

applicant’s request because, although he had a memorandum for record from his company commander, there was no endorsement from his chain of command to support his claim.

9.  A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment or rebuttal.  He responded by providing three memoranda from his chain of command.  A memorandum from his new company commander stated that the APFT track had been 65 yards too long and it was reasonable to assume that the applicant would have passed the APFT in May 2000 had the track been the correct distance.  A memorandum from his battalion-level commander stated that the command was aware of the circumstances surrounding the delay in the applicant’s promotion and supported his request to change his effective date of rank to 1 June 2000.  A memorandum from his brigade-level commander recommended approval of the applicant’s request to correct his date of rank.

10.  On 11 January 2002, Promotions Branch, PERSCOM clarified their advisory opinion to reflect that they had meant that if the applicant’s battalion and brigade commanders both agreed that the May 2000 APFT was not valid, then the flag would have been invalid and he should have been promoted on 1 June 2000.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In accordance with the advisory opinion and with the information obtained from the applicant’s chain of command, it appears that the May 2000 APFT, which the applicant failed, in turn preventing his promotion to captain on 1 June 2000, was invalid.  Therefore, he should not have been flagged and he would have been eligible for promotion to captain on 1 June 2000.

2.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the APFT the applicant completed in May 2000 was invalid, that he was not flagged for APFT failure, and that he was eligible for promotion to captain on 1 June 2000.

2.  That the records be corrected to show the applicant was promoted to captain with an effective date and a date of rank 1 June 2000 with all due back pay and allowances.

BOARD VOTE:  

__gdp___  __wtm___  __rtd___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			George D. Paxson
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001059871	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020124	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.04	
2.	131.05	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.