PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            17 JULY 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2002080229

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Gale J. Thomas		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann Langston		Chairperson	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that her records be corrected by reinstating her original date of rank of 1 September 2001 to staff sergeant, and by removing from her records, a DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) dated 
6 January 2002, reduction orders dated 25 January 2002 and amendment orders dated 6 February 2002.   

3.  The applicant states that she was denied enrollment to the Basic Noncommissioned Officer Course (BNCOC) for being overweight and that she was wrongly reduced for failure to complete the course.  However, the PERSCOM Reinstatement Panel reinstated her to the list but the imposed reduction was not lifted until she finished the course.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that the applicant was conditionally promoted to staff sergeant on 1 September 2001, contingent on successful completion of BNCOC. 

5.  In January 2002, the applicant was denied enrollment in BNCOC Course 600-6, for failure to meet body fat standards.

6.  On 25 January 2002, as a result of her disenrollment from BNCOC her promotion to pay grade E-6 was revoked by Orders 025-21, dated 25 January 2002, with an effective date of 7 January 2002.  On 6 February 2002, her reduction orders were amended by Orders 037-3, dated 6 January 2002, to change the  effective date of her reduction to 6 January 2002. 

7.  The applicant’s chain of command verified that the applicant met the body fat composition prior to her enrollment in BNCOC and after she returned to the unit after being denied enrollment, and questioned the accuracy and validity of the tape test.  One member of her command noted that the applicant was in compliance with the standards outlined in Army Regulation 600-9 prior to her departure to attend BNCOC.  Upon her arrival at BNCOC the test was administered by three different groups of NCO’s with three different results.  After the applicant’s return to the Personnel Information Systems Directorate (PERSINSD) she was administered a Health Assessment Evaluation at DeWitt Army Medical Center and found to be in compliance with Army standards.

8.  On 7 March 2002, the Headquarters, Department of Army NCOES Reinstatement Panel reinstated the applicant to the promotion and BNCOC lists with the stipulation that she be rescheduled as soon as practical and that she complete the course prior to promotion.  The Reinstatement Panel did not specify the basis for their decision to permit the applicant to be reenrolled in the BNCOC.

9.  The applicant reenrolled in BNCOC on 12 May 2002 and successfully completed the course on 17 July 2002.

10.  The applicant was promoted to the pay grade of E-6, with a date of rank and effective date of 17 July 2002.  

11.  The DA Form 1059, dated 6 January 2002 the applicant requested be removed from her records was not filed in her records.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence indicates that there was clearly some consistency problems with the applicant’s weight verification at the time she was originally scheduled to report to BNCOC.  The fact that she was permitted to be reenrolled and have her name restored to the promotion list by the Reinstatement Panel supports a conclusion that those inconsistencies may have erroneously contributed to her dismissal from the BNCOC.  As such, the Board concludes that the applicant should not be further penalized by the retention of documents in her Official Military Personnel File which were the result of questionable information.  To avoid future disadvantages and avoid confusion, the applicant’s reduction orders (Orders 025-21, dated 25 January 2002) and the orders with amended the reduction orders (Orders 037-3, dated       6 February 2002) should be expunged from the applicant’s file.  

2.  In the interest of justice and equity the applicant’s date of rank and effective date should be adjusted from 17 July 2002, to her original promotion date of           1 September 2001, with entitlement to all appropriate back pay and allowances.  

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:

a.  by showing the applicant was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 with a date of rank and effective date of 1 September 2001, with entitlement to back pay and allowances as appropriate, and 

b.  by removing from her records reduction Orders 025-21,dated 25 January 2002, and amendment Orders 037-3, dated 6 February 2002.

BOARD VOTE:  

__JHL___  __RKS __  __JTM__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		___Joann H. Langston______
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002080299	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030717	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.	133.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.