| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock | Analyst |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher | Member | |
| Mr. Bernard P. Ingold | Member |
2. The applicant requests that her records be corrected to show that she was promoted to sergeant effective and with a date of rank of 26 July 2001.
3. The applicant states that an exception to policy for her to be promoted [under the provisions of the Army Civilian Acquired Skill Program (ACASP)] was first submitted in September 2001. The request was delayed for three months, and a second request was submitted in December 2001. Because of the delays, the request was not processed within the required six months. Consequently, she was not promoted [when she should have been]. She met the training requirements for promotion.
4. The applicant’s military records show that she enlisted in the Army for four years on 21 March 2001 in pay grade E-4 under the provisions of the ACASP. She enlisted as a practical nurse, MOS (military occupational specialty) 91C. She stated that she understood that enlistment under that program authorized her to be advanced in grade based upon her demonstrated skill, proficiency, and conduct as a soldier. She indicated that she would be advanced to pay grade E-5 in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210 provided she received a recommendation from her commander. She stated that she understood that promotion was not automatic but depended upon her demonstration of proficiency, skill, and conduct.
5. On 24 May 2001 orders were published assigning her from Fort Jackson, South Carolina, to the Army Medical Department Activity (MEDDAC) at Fort Stewart, Georgia, with a reporting date of 1 June 2001.
6. In a 21 December 2001 memorandum to the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) the MEDDAC commander at Fort Stewart recommended that the applicant be promoted to sergeant effective on 26 July 2001 as an exception to policy. He stated that the applicant completed her proficiency training on 26 July 2001. In a 22 February 2002 memorandum to PERSCOM the applicant’s company commander made the same recommendation. There is no information concerning a response to either request; however, on 18 March 2002 the applicant’s support battalion commander informed the MEDDAC commander that the applicant had to submit the promotion request to this Board.
7. Orders published on 30 April 2002 show that the applicant was promoted to sergeant effective and with a date of rank of 16 October 2001.
8. On 8 October 2002 the applicant was honorably discharged from the Army because of pregnancy.
9. Army Regulation 601-210, chapter 7, provides policy and guidance for the implementation of the ACASP. The ACASP attracts and uses persons with civilian acquired skills required by the Army. Persons qualified for the ACASP may be given an advance in grade upon enlistment and may be entitled to accelerated promotion based on the skill level held and demonstrated duty performance. Promotion to the accelerated grade and award of the MOS authorized by the enlistment agreement will be made either with the approval of the unit commander or by the training commander for active Army personnel, after successful completion of all training required by the enlistment program selected. Table 7-1 lists the skills and criteria authorized for the ACASP, and states that to qualify for MOS 91C20 as a practical nurse with later appointment to pay grade E-5 a soldier must have successfully completed a State-approved course in practical, registered, or vocational nursing; must have successfully passed the National Council of State Boards of Nursing Licensure Examination and possess current state license as a practical or vocational nurse; and must have completed a specified period of proficiency training as a prerequisite for award of the MOS, and be able to perform the duty requirements of the MOS before award of the MOS and promotion to an accelerated pay grade.
10. Army Regulation 600-8-19 provides for enlisted promotions and states in pertinent part that soldiers enlisted into the Army under ACASP in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210 will be promoted under this paragraph [AR 600-8-19, paragraph 3-7]. The effective date and date of rank will be the date all requirements are met.
11. In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the PERSCOM. That command indicated that there was no document to substantiate that the promotion authority submitted a promotion request on 1 September 2001; and that a staff action processed on 15 April 2002 indicated that the promotion authority determined that she be promoted on 16 October 2001. The PERSCOM recommended that her request be denied. The applicant was furnished a copy of the advisory opinion on 4 June 2002 for her information and possible rebuttal. She failed to respond.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. Both the applicant’s company commander and MEDDAC commander recommended that the applicant be promoted to sergeant effective on 26 July 2001, the date that she completed the required proficiency training. The Board recognizes that both recommendations were more than likely received later than the 6 month window required by PERSCOM. Nonetheless, the requests for an exception to that policy are not unreasonable. The applicant completed the required training. Any delay in recommending her for promotion does not appear to be her fault.
2. Therefore, and notwithstanding the advisory opinion, the applicant’s records should be corrected to show that she was promoted to sergeant effective and with a date of rank of 26 July 2001. She should receive all due pay and allowances in that grade effective on 26 July 2001 through her discharge date of 8 October 2002.
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 Sergeant, pay grade E-5, effective and with a date of rank of 26 July 2001, and that she receive all due pay and allowances in that grade effective on 26 July 2001 through her discharge date of 8 October 2002.
BOARD VOTE:
__RWA__ __KYF_ _ __BPI _ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
_____Roger W. Able______
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2002071526 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20021212 |
| 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. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071359C070402
In an undated advisory opinion, the Chief, Promotions Branch at the Total Army Personnel Command stated that the applicant’s packet did not contain the promotion authority’s approval of the promotion as required by Army Regulation 601-210, and that promotion requests submitted 6 months after the date the soldier completes the required training must be forwarded to the ACASP proponent for determination.14. The applicant’s commanding officer recommended that the applicant be promoted to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071527C070402
He stated that she met all the requirements of Army Regulation 601-210, and should have been recommended for promotion on the completion of her training as stated in her enlistment contract. In a 17 June 2002 advisory opinion, the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff G-1 recommended that the applicant be retroactively promoted to the rank of sergeant with a date or rank of 18 January 2001 and that she receive all due pay and allowances from that date. The applicant’s present commander and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071580C070402
On 3 July 2001, an instructor of the Nursing Education Service, BAMC, recommended that the applicant be awarded MOS 91C based on her successful completion of 8 weeks of proficiency training and that she be granted an accelerated promotion to SGT/E-5 in accordance with paragraph 7-11, Army Regulation 601-210, the ACASP enlistment option. The advisory opinion noted that the applicant had completed the required training on 3 July 2001, and had received a recommendation for accelerated...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004103309C070208
On 17 November 2001, the applicant’s commanding officer submitted a DA Form 4187 requesting that she be promoted to the pay grade of E-5 under the ACASP. In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Director, Health Service Personnel Management, United States Army Human Resources Command, who opined that the applicant completed her 91C, Licensed Practical Nurse training on 8 November 2001 and should have, at that time been promoted to the rank of sergeant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083430C070212
APPLICANT REQUESTS: The applicant requests that her records be corrected to show that she was promoted to sergeant effective and with a date of rank of 27 June 1997. There is no evidence of any proficiency training completed, nor any evidence that she was recommended for promotion by her prior unit commanders. Consequently, and notwithstanding the recommendation made by her current hospital commander, there is insufficient evidence to grant the applicant's request.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03092998C070212
That office stated that the applicant should have been enlisted in pay grade E-3 under the provisions of the CASP, with later promotion to pay grade E-4; however, the guidance counselor [who enlisted the applicant] made an obvious error, enlisting the applicant in pay grade E-4 with later promotion to pay grade E-5; and consequently, in view of that information in his contract, the applicant believed that he would be eligible for an accelerated promotion to E-5 upon completion of proficiency...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063283C070421
The applicant’s military records show that she enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 May 2000 under the Army Civilian Acquired Skills Enlistment Program (ACASP) for Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 91C (Practical Nurse), in the pay grade of E-4. The applicant enlisted in the Army under the Army Civilian Acquired Skills Program for MOS 91C, she completed her 8 weeks of proficiency training, was awarded MOS 91C, and given an assignment as a Practical Nurse. That all of the Department of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070091C070402
The applicant states that he has not been promoted even though he met all the requirements contained in the regulation. He submits with his request a memorandum from his commanding officer requesting that he be promoted, a copy of DD Form 1966 series (Record of Military Processing), a copy of his enlistment document (DD Form 4 series), a copy of DA Form 3286-64 (Statement for Enlistment), a copy of DA Form 3286-68 (Statement for Enlistment – Civilian Acquired Skills Enlistment Program), a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064236C070421
The applicant was enlisted under the ACASP in MOS 91C. Her enlistment contract specified that she would enter the Army as an SPC/E-4 and, upon completion of training, would be promoted to the rank of SGT/E-5. The applicant’s chain of command supports her promotion to SGT/E-5 with a date of rank and effective date of 18 January 2000.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064207C070421
The applicant’s military records show that, with a degree and license in practical nursing, she enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years on 27 August 1999 in MOS 91C, and for the US Army Station/Unit/Command/Area Enlistment Program, and the ACASP. The applicant was enlisted under the ACASP in MOS 91C. Her enlistment contract specified that she would enter the Army as an SPC/E-4 and, upon completion of training, would be promoted to the rank of SGT/E-5.