2.  The applicant requests that his promotion to the pay grade of E-5 be backdated to 1 March 1996.

3.  The applicant states that he met the cutoff score for promotion to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 April 1996.  However, because his basic active service date (BASD) was incorrect on his records, he was not considered eligible in the primary zone and thus was not promoted until 1 May 1996. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that the applicant initially enlisted on 29 August 1988 for a period of 4 years.  He served until he was honorably released from active duty at his scheduled expiration of term of service on 26 August 1992 and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Ready).

5.  On 26 August 1993 the applicant again enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years in the pay grade of   E-4.  His BASD was established as 28 August 1989.

6.  The applicant appeared before an E-5 promotion board in July 1995 and was recommended for promotion.  He attained list standing and his points were effective 1 October 1995. He had 561 points at that time.

7.  On 1 March 1996 the promotion point cutoff score for promotion to the pay grade of E-5 in the primary zone (36 months or more of active federal service) was 560 points.  However, the applicant’s records indicated that the applicant’s BASD was 26 August 1993, (the date he enlisted for the second time) which placed the applicant in the secondary zone (less than 36 months of service).  Consequently, the applicant was not promoted until the following month with an effective date and date of rank of 1 April 1996.

8.  In the processing of this case a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (EREC) which opined that the applicant was eligible for promotion to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 March 1996 and recommended that his records be corrected accordingly.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  An administrative error which resulted in the applicant’s BASD being incorrectly annotated in the applicant’s personnel records has unjustly caused the applicant’s promotion to the pay grade of E-5 to be delayed a month. 

2.  The applicant was eligible to be promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 March 1996 and therefore it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicant’s records to reflect that he was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 effective 1 March 1996 with entitlement to all pay and allowances from that date.

3.  In  view of the foregoing the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 effective 1 March 1996 with entitlement to all pay and allowances from that date. 

BOARD VOTE:  

                       GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




		                           
		        CHAIRPERSON