MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:  3 November 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999015610

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Vic Whitney		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Edwin S. Castle		Member	
	Mr. Stanley Kelly		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:  In effect, that his date of rank as a major be changed from the current effective date of 3 March 1998 to 1 November 1997.  He submits a copy of his recommendation for promotion to major from his battalion which is dated 19 October 1997.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was assigned to a major’s position effective 1 November 1997 and administrative delays in his Federal recognition process resulted in a much later effective date.  He had hand-carried his ARNG promotion packet through channels on 18 October for a 19 October 1997 ARNG promotion board with all of the required documentation.  In January 1998 he was informed that his original college transcripts were missing and were needed for the packet.  He had the transcripts replaced and his promotion request was processed.  He states that the transcripts were present in April 1997 when he was considered for promotion by HQDA and he should not be penalized for their absence or the delay in notification to obtain new copies.

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

He was serving in the grade of captain in the ARNG when he was selected on his second consideration for promotion to major by the HQDA 1997 Reserve Components Selection Board.  On 19 October 1997 his battalion commander forwarded a request to recommend the applicant for promotion to major noting that there was a proposed assignment for him at that grade.

Effective 1 November 1997 he was transferred to a new unit, presumably in a position calling for the grade of O-4 (major).  On 11 February 1998 he was promoted to major, ARNG, effective 11 February 1998.  The additional instructions on the State promotion order specify that he will not be paid as a major until Federal recognition is confirmed.

On 3 March 1998 the National Guard Bureau (NGB) published orders which extended Federal recognition to the applicant for his promotion to major effective 3 March 1998.

Title 10, US Code, section 14308(f) provides the establishment of law governing the effective date of promotion after Federal recognition.  It provides, in pertinent part, that the effective date of promotion shall be the date on which such Federal recognition in that grade is so extended.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  There is no evidence of record, and none submitted by the applicant, to support his contention that his Federal recognition and subsequent promotion to major were unduly delayed due to administrative error.  It is highly unlikely that a promotion recommendation at the unit level could be acted on the same date at the State level as the applicant had expected.

2.  Title 10, US Code clearly states that the effective date of promotion for an ARNG officer will be coincident with Federal recognition.

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

__FE___  __EC___  ___SK__  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999015610	
SUFFIX		
		
DATE BOARDED	19991103	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.04	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.