RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 May 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060014755 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. Gerard W. Schwartz Acting Director Ms. Wanda L. Waller Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Mr. William Crain Chairperson Mr. Donald Lewy Member Mr. Roland Venable Member 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, in effect, that her date of rank (DOR) for promotion to first lieutenant be adjusted. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that her DOR is incorrect and that the delay and error were due to her unit’s neglect to submit the necessary information for promotion. 3. The applicant provides a copy of her appointment letter; memoranda, dated 10 March 2001 and 10 January 2003; and a promotion letter, dated 11 April 2003. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant was appointed a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), Medical Service Corps, on 10 December 2000. She took an oath of office on 10 December 2000 and she completed the Officer Basic Course on 23 May 2002. 2. On 10 January 2003, the applicant was notified that she was not in a promotable status because she did not have a DA Form 71 (Oath of Office) and a DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) verifying completion of the Officer Basic Course on file, and she did not possess a valid security clearance. 3. The applicant was promoted to first lieutenant with a DOR of 25 February 2003. 4. In support of her claim, the applicant provided a memorandum, dated 10 March 2001, from the Chief, Reserve Appointments Branch, U.S. Total Army Personnel Command at St. Louis, Missouri which states that the applicant’s security clearance would be initiated by the unit. 5. In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Special Actions Branch, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri. The opinion states that based on two years time in grade the applicant’s promotion eligibility date (PED) to first lieutenant was 9 December 2002. She did not possess a valid security clearance at that time; therefore, she was not eligible for promotion. The opinion states that she was granted a clearance on 26 March 2003 and promoted to first lieutenant with a DOR of 25 February 2003. Since she did not meet all promotion requirements on her PED she is not eligible for an earlier DOR. That office recommended that the applicant’s request be disapproved. 6. A copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for comment and possible rebuttal. She did not respond within the given time frame. 7. Army Regulation 135-101, prescribes the policies, procedures and eligibility criteria for appointment of commissioned officers in the Reserve, in the six branches of the Army Medical Department. Paragraph 1-5(3)d specifies that an applicant must have been the subject of a National Agency Check (NAC) or investigation. The appointment authority will initiate the NAC and the Federal Bureau of Investigation Name Check for appointees without concurrent call to active duty, if not previously accomplished. If, as a result of completion of the post commissioning investigative process, an individual is unacceptable for appointment as a commissioned officer, the officer will be discharged. 8. Army Regulation 135-155, paragraph 4-11a (3-5), specifies that the officer must be medically qualified, have undergone a favorable security screening, and meet standards of the Army Body Composition Program. Paragraph 4-13 specifies that promotion authorities will ensure that a favorable security screening is completed before announcing a promotion. The military personnel records jacket will be screened to ensure that derogatory or unfavorable suitability information is not contained therein for promotion purposes. If the results of this screening are favorable, final promotion action may proceed. 9. On 24 May 2007, the Chief, Special Actions Branch, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, U.S. Army Human Resources Command in St. Louis verified that he saw no evidence of a flag that would suspend any favorable personnel action in the applicant’s file, that nothing is stated in the Soldier Management System, and that he did not see anything in the Personnel Electronic Records Management System [that may have precluded a favorable security screening]. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. It is reasonable to presume that a favorable NAC was completed on the applicant or else she would not have been appointed or retained. 2. The applicant was erroneously informed on 10 January 2003 that she was not in a promotable status because she did not possess a valid security clearance. The regulation requires only a favorable security screening. Per the email from the Chief, Special Actions Branch, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, U.S. Army Human Resources Command in St. Louis, Missouri, it appears there is nothing in her records that would have prevented her promotion to first lieutenant on 9 December 2002. Therefore, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s military records to show her effective date of promotion to first lieutenant in the USAR is 9 December 2002 with a DOR of 9 December 2002. BOARD VOTE: WC_____ _DL____ __RV___ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected to show she was promoted to first lieutenant in the USAR on 9 December 2002 with a DOR of 9 December 2002. ___William Crain______ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20060014755 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20070531 TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION GRANT REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 112.0200 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.