RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  18 March 2004
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003091553

	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	
	Ms. Stephanie Thompkins		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Roger W. Able		Chairperson	
	Mr. Robert J. Osborn		Member	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		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).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:  

1.  The applicant requests adjustment to his date of rank for first lieutenant from 22 July 1996 to 22 July 1995.

2.  The applicant states that the required time in grade as a second lieutenant is 24 months as a Reserve officer.  His promotion request was sent in to obtain a 36-month promotion.  His position and service should have allowed him to receive promotion on time, if not for misinformation from his unit administrator of the time in service for a second lieutenant.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his appointment memorandum and Oath of Office, his Service School Academic Evaluation Report, a Letter of Commendation, his promotion memorandum for first lieutenant, and his Officer Evaluation Report for the period ending 7 August 1995.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant’s military records show he was appointed in the Reserve, Signal Corps, as a second lieutenant effective 23 July 1993.  Based on the required 3 years time in grade, his maximum time in grade for promotion to first lieutenant was 22 July 1996.

2.  The applicant was promoted to first lieutenant effective 22 July 1996.

3.  Army Regulation 135-155, prescribes the policies and procedures for promotion of Reserve officers.  This regulation specifies that Reserve officers appointed prior to 1 October 1996 in the grade of second lieutenant will be considered for promotion after serving 3 years (36 months) time in grade without review by a selection board. This will be determined far enough in advance to permit promotion on the date promotion service is completed.  The regulation also shows that 2 years of time in grade is required on or after 1 October 1996.

4.  The Reserve Officers Personnel Management Act (ROPMA), a public law enacted by Congress on 5 October 1994, prescribes the policies and procedures to consolidate and modernize the laws that govern Reserve component officers.  The law was implemented on 1 October 1996.  ROPMA provides that Reserve officers appointed on or after 1 October 1996 in the grade of second lieutenant will be considered for promotion to first lieutenant after serving 2 years time in grade without review by a selection board.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant is not entitled to correction to his date of rank for first lieutenant.

2.  The applicant’s contention that his promotion to first lieutenant was not on time and he received misinformation of the time in service for a second lieutenant have been noted.  However, the applicant was appointed as a second lieutenant effective 23 July 1993 prior to the implementation of ROPMA, which became effective 1 October 1996.  Promotion to first lieutenant prior to ROPMA required completion of 3 years time in grade as a second lieutenant.  

3.  Under ROPMA an officer appointed as a second lieutenant on or after 1 October 1996 would be eligible for promotion to first lieutenant upon completion of 2 years time in grade.  Officers appointed prior to that date were not granddfathered under the guidelines of ROPMA for entitlement to promotion to first lieutenant within 2 years.

4.  The applicant’s date of rank for first lieutenant of 22 July 1996 was proper and he has not shown otherwise.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__ra____  ___ro___  ___ls___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

		__Roger W. Able_____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003091553	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20040318	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.	131.05	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.