IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160006863 BOARD VOTE: ___x_____ ___x___ ____x___ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160006863 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is 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 by amending his date of rank (DOR) to first lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve to 15 May 2015 with an effective DOR of 18 December 2015. _____________x____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160006863 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his date of rank (DOR) to first lieutenant (1LT)/O-2 in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) be backdated with an effective date of 14 May 2015. 2. The applicant states: a. He was commissioned into the USAR on 15 November 2013 at Georgia Military College through the Early Commissioning Program. b. He served in the USAR proficiently until 15 January 2016 when he transitioned to the Regular Army (RA) where he continued to serve as a second lieutenant (2LT)/O-1. c. He was eligible for promotion to 1LT/O-2 in the USAR on 14 May 2015; however, due to an administrative error, his name was not added to the scroll for promotion until 16 May 2015. The scroll took over 9 months to be processed and approved, which made it useless to him when it was finally approved as he had already transitioned into the RA and his name had to be added to the RA scroll. d. As it stands, he will be behind his year group for promotion to captain (CPT)/O-3 unless his DOR is changed to 14 May 2015. e. It is unjust that he should suffer because of administrative errors that were out of his control and have negatively impacted his career. f. He was not put on a promotion scroll in advance and had to personally call the promotions branch to correct the error on 16 May 2015. After he confirmed that he was put on the next scroll, the processing time of that scroll was extremely long. His DOR for 1LT/O-2 needs to be changed to 14 May 2015 to remedy this situation and put his promotion to CPT in line with his peers. 3. The applicant provides a DA Form 71 (Oath of Office – Military Personnel), dated 15 November 2013. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant had prior enlisted service in the USAR. 2. On 15 November 2013, the applicant was appointed as a commissioned officer in the USAR in the rank/grade of 2LT/O-1. 3. The applicant met all requirements to be eligible for promotion to 1LT/O-2 in the USAR on 14 May 2015 (i.e., 18 months of time in grade). 4. A DA Form 71 shows the applicant took the oath of office in the RA on 19 January 2016 as a 2LT/O-1. 5. Orders 196-002, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), dated 14 July 2106, shows he was appointed to the rank/grade of 1LT/O-2 in the RA on 2 June 2016. 6. In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Officer Promotions, Special Actions Branch, U.S. Army HRC, Fort Knox, KY, which states: a. Based on a review of our records and the information provided, we find the applicant’s request to promote him to 1LT/O-2 in the USAR prior to him transferring to the Active Duty List does have merit. b. The applicant’s delay of promotion was not due to any fault of his own. The primary reason for the delay in appointment included, but may not have been limited to: (1) an initial administrative or system error that did not correctly calculate or recognize the applicant as eligible for scroll appointment, approval and promotion, ( 2) the Personnel Suitability Screening Process dictated by the Department of Defense Instruction 1320.l04, section 3583, and Deputy Chief of Staff/G1 Standard Operating Procedure, and (3) the date the approved documents were received by their office. c. The Secretary of Defense approved the appointment scroll containing the applicant’s name to 1LT/O-2 while in the USAR on 18 December 2015, prior to his 19 January 2016 appointment to active duty. Their office was not made aware either by the applicant nor his command of any impending transfer which would have likely affected his appointment status; if so, they may have advised him to consider deferring his appointment to active duty until his promotion orders in the USAR were published. d. Although the applicant’s effective promotion date cannot be earlier than 18 December 2015, the recommendation is that his DOR be retroactive to his USAR promotion eligibility date of 15 May 2015. The recommendation does not violate Title 10, U.S. Code, section 12203(a) and allows the applicant seniority. 7. The applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion for response and/or rebuttal. He did not respond. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 600-8-29 (Officer Promotions) prescribes the policies and procedures for promotion of active duty officers. This regulation states that to be considered for promotion, an officer must be on the active duty list (ADL) on the date the board convenes. The law establishes no minimum TIG requirements for consideration for promotion; however, an officer must have at least 18 months of time in grade to be promoted to 1LT/O-2. Commissioned officers are promoted from promotion lists in order of seniority (shown by the promotion sequence number) as additional officers are needed within each competitive category. Promotions would be announced in Headquarters, Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) orders. 2. Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other than General Officers) states, in pertinent part, that the effective date of promotion for commissioned officers may not precede the date on which the promotion memorandum is issued and the promotion memorandum will not be issued before the date the promotion board results are approved and confirmed by the Senate (if required). In addition, the officer must be assigned or attached to a position in the higher grade or, if an Individual Ready Reserve or Individual Mobilization Augmentee officer selected by a mandatory promotion board, they must have completed the regulatory maximum years of service in their present grade before being promoted to the next higher grade. DISCUSSION: 1. It appears the applicant’s delay in promotion to 1LT/O-2 in the USAR was due to an administrative error, in that the promotions branch did not correctly calculate or recognize him as eligible for scroll appointment, approval, and promotion. 2. The HRC advisory opinion also notes that that office was not made aware by the applicant or his chain of command of an impending transfer which would have likely affected his appointment status. Had they known, they would have advised the applicant to consider deferring his appointment into the RA until promotion orders in the USAR were published. 3. The advisory opinion further notes that the Secretary of Defense approved the appointment scroll containing the applicant’s name to 1LT/O-2 while in the USAR on 18 December 2015, prior to his 19 January 2016 appointment to active duty. 4. This Board may not alter an effective date of promotion as this function is reserved for the Secretary of Defense. The advisory opinion states, however, that although the applicant’s effective DOR (i.e., the date he became eligible for pay and allowances in the higher grade) cannot be earlier than 18 December 2015 (the date the Secretary of Defense signed the scroll bearing his name), this Board may recommend that his DOR be retroactive to his USAR promotion eligibility date of 15 May 2015. This recommendation would not violate Title 10, U.S. Code, section 12203(a), and would allow the applicant seniority. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160006863 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160006863 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2