BOARD DATE: 7 June 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110012026 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 adjustment of his major (MAJ) date of rank (DOR) to 3 February 2008. 2. The applicant states that when entering the Virginia Army National Guard (VAARNG) from active duty, an incorrect basic active service date (BASD) and captain (CPT) DOR were entered into his record. He states that by the time his BASD and DOR to CPT were corrected, he was in the process of being promoted to MAJ through the unit vacancy system. He states the reason for his promotion through the unit vacancy system was because his record was never sent to a promotion selection board. 3. The applicant provides officer evaluation reports and amended appointment orders in support of his request. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. After having served on active duty and in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), the applicant was appointed a CPT in the VAARNG on 19 April 2007. The applicant's CPT DOR was initially recorded as 15 July 2005 and his pay entry basic date (PEBD) as 15 December 1996. These dates were corrected and amendment orders were published with the correct CPT DOR of 1 October 2003 and PEBD of 1 March 1995. 2. On 9 February 2010, National Guard Bureau (NGB) Special Orders Number 24 AR extended Federal recognition to the applicant for the purpose of promotion to MAJ effective 3 February 2010. 3. On 12 February 2010, NGB published a memorandum promoting the applicant to MAJ effective and with a DOR of 3 February 2010. 4. In connection with the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Personnel Division, NGB, dated 30 April 2012. The advisory official recommended disapproval of the applicant's request for a change of the effective date of his promotion to and DOR for MAJ. The official stated that although the applicant's CPT DOR and PBED were initially recorded incorrectly by the VAARNG upon his appointment on 19 April 2007, these errors were corrected on 4 December 2008. He further stated the applicant met the minimum time-in-grade requirements for promotion to MAJ on 1 October 2007 and his maximum time in grade would have been 1 October 2010. He further indicates the applicant was promoted to MAJ based on a unit vacancy and the effective date and DOR of this promotion is the date NGB extended Federal recognition. 5. On 1 May 2012, the applicant was provided a copy of the NGB advisory opinion in order to have the opportunity to respond to or rebut its contents. To date, he has failed to reply. 6. National Guard Regulation 600-100 (Commissioned Officers – Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions) provides procedures for processing applications for Federal recognition. Chapter 8 provides guidance on promotion for other than general officers and states that the promotion of officers in the ARNG is a function of the State. Chapter 10 contains guidance on the Federal recognition process and states that Federal recognition is extended by the Chief, NGB. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contention that his promotion and Federal recognition as a MAJ should have been accomplished on 3 February 2008 and it was because of errors in the CPT DOR and PEBD recorded by the VAARNG at the time of his appointment has been carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim. 2. By regulation, officer promotions are a function of the State. The governing law and regulation allow for DOR adjustments only if the member has reached or exceeded the maximum time in grade for his grade if selected by a mandatory promotion selection board. In this case, given the applicant would not have reached his maximum time in grade for promotion to MAJ until after the effective date of his unit vacancy promotion, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support an adjustment to his MAJ DOR. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __x___ __x______ __x______ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. ____________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. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110012026 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110012026 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1