APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Correction of his enlistment contract dated 29 March 1995 to show that he enlisted in the pay grade of E-5 instead of pay grade E-4.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that because his separation document (DD Form 214) dated 4 February 1994 did not reflect his promotion to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 February 1994, he was not properly enlisted in the pay grade of E-5 when he enlisted on 29 March 1995.  He goes on to state that he was informed that the necessary corrections would take place at his first duty station.  

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

After serving 5 years, 4 months, and 20 days of total active service, the applicant was honorably released from active duty in the pay grade of E-5 and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) on 4 February 1994.  The applicant was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 February 1994 and his separation documents did not reflect his promotion at the time of his separation from the service.

On 29 March 1995 the applicant enlisted for a period of 2 years in the pay grade of E-4.

On 26 October 1995 the Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (EREC) corrected the applicant’s DD Form 214 dated 4 February 1994 to reflect his correct rank at the time of his separation.

In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) was obtained from the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM).  It opined that had the applicant’s separation documents correctly reflected his rank as an E-5, he would not have been allowed to enlist.  Consequently, the applicant was allowed to reenlist in the highest grade available for his military occupational specialty at the time, based on a waiver.  The PERSCOM recommended that his request be denied because he would not have been granted authorization to enlist in the pay grade of E-5.
DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  The applicant was aware that he was being enlisted in the pay grade of E-4 at the time he enlisted.  Consequently, if he did not agree with the conditions of his enlistment he could have declined to do so.

2.  Inasmuch as the applicant would have been denied the opportunity to enlist had it been known that he was an E-5 at the time he was separated from the service, there is no basis to approve his request.

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

4.  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

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director