IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 July 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090008105 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, in effect, accelerated promotion to sergeant (SGT) under the Army Civilian Acquired Skills Program (ACASP). 2. The applicant states, in effect, that he believes his rank should have been advanced to SGT upon his successful completion of military occupational specialty (MOS) training. He claims he was told by his recruiter and recruiting personnel at the Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS). 3. The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application: Self-Authored Statement; Resume; DD Form 4 (Enlistment Record); Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) license, dated 12 December 1988; DA Forms 638 (Recommendations for Award), dated 18 August 2006 and 30 January 2007; Letter of Commendation for Superior Academic Achievement, dated 16 January 2007; Health Care Specialist Course Certificate, dated 16 January 2007; and DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER)), dated 19 January 2007. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for 3 years, in the pay grade of E-4, and entered active duty on 8 May 2006. 2. The DA Form 3286 (Statement for Enlistment) completed during his enlistment processing shows he enlisted for Program 9B (United States Army Station/Unit/Area/Command Enlistment Program) and Program 9C (United States Army Incentive Program) (United States Army High Grad Bonus, 30-39 Semester Hours) and (United States Army Civilian Acquired Skills Bonus). The applicant certified that he read, viewed and understood the information concerning his enlistment options. The DA Form 3286 is void of any promises regarding promotion to sergeant and the applicant and his recruiting guidance counselor authenticated this form with their signatures on the date of his enlistment, 6 June 2006. 3. During the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Department of the Army (DA) Chief, Recruiting Policy, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1. This official confirms the applicant enlisted under the ACASP in MOS 91WM6 with an entry grade of E-4. He states that under this program, after 8 weeks of proficiency training after arrival at first duty station, the unit commander should have awarded the applicant the MOS 91WM6 or reclassified the applicant if he failed to satisfy training requirements. He further states that in May 2005, the Army policy governing the ACASP policy was changed to provide for members enlisting under the ACASP program to be enlisted in the pay grade E-4; however, the change in policy provided no provisions for advanced promotion. As a result, this DA recruiting official recommended denial of the applicant's request. 4. On 28 May 2009, the applicant was provided a copy of the G-1 advisory opinion in order to have the opportunity to respond or to rebut its contents. To date, he has failed to reply. 5. Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Component Enlistment Program) prescribes eligibility criteria governing the enlistment of persons, with or without prior service (PS), into the Regular Army (RA), the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), and the Army National Guard (ARNG). Chapter 7 provides guidance on the ACASP and paragraph 7-12 provides guidance on award of MOS, enlistment grade and accelerated promotion. It states, in pertinent part, that applicants enlisting under ACASP will be enlisted in pay grade E-4 and no further accelerated promotion is authorized unless enlisting in United States Army Special Bands. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contention that he should have received an accelerated promotion to SGT after completing MOS training was carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim. 2. By regulation, members enlisting under the ACASP program are authorized to be enlisted in the pay grade E-4; however, no additional accelerated promotion is authorized unless the member is enlisting in the United States Army Special Bands Program. 3. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was enlisted in the pay grade of E-4, as he was guaranteed under the ACASP enlistment option and that he was guaranteed no additional accelerated promotion under the terms of his enlistment contract. Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief. 4. 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 this requirement. 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 that 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) AR20090008105 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090008105 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1