APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Correction of her military records to show that she was granted constructive service credit for her education and experience when she was commissioned.

APPLICANT STATES:  That she did not receive any constructive credit for her education and experience when she was commissioned.  However, other officers who were commissioned after her have received constructive credit and are being promoted ahead of her.  She goes on to state that she believes this is unfair and should be corrected.

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

She was commissioned as a USAR second lieutenant in the Army Nurse Corps on 1 October 1986.  At the time of her appointment she had completed a baccalaureate degree in nursing (BSN) and was not granted any constructive credit for education of experience.

She was promoted to the rank of captain on 29 September l993.

In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Army Recruiting Command.  It opined that entry grade credit was not in effect at the time the applicant was appointed and that entry grade credit for a BSN degree is not authorized because it is considered a basic nursing degree.  The Recruiting Command also opined that the constructive service credit program was suspended on 15 September 1981 and remained suspended until the program was reinstated on 4 December 1987.

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.  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.

2.  The applicant’s contention that it is unfair that officers who were commissioned after her are receiving constructive credit for education and experience is without merit.  The applicant had the option of accepting or declining her commission if she believed the terms to be unfair.  While it is unfortunate that the program was not in effect during the time the applicant accepted her commission, it was strictly her choice to accept or decline the commission.  Consequently, the suspension of the constructive credit program during the period she was commissioned does not constitute an error or injustice on the part of the Department and likewise does not support a correction of her records.  

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

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director