RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          16 June 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040006350


      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. Rosa M. Chandler              |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Raymond J. Wagner             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin              |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Delia R. Trimble              |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that she be promoted from specialist four, pay
grade E-4, to sergeant, pay grade E-5, effective 1 February 2001, in
accordance with Army Regulation 601-210, under the Army Civilian Acquired
Skills Program (ACASP).

2.  The applicant states that she desires that her record be corrected so
she may be eligible to go before the staff sergeant, E-6 promotion board.

3.  The applicant provides in support of her request:

      a.  DA Form 3286-68 (Statement for Enlistment-ACASP), dated 14 May
2001.

      b.  United States Air Force Certificate of Training, dated 9 October
2001, which shows the applicant successfully completed the Electronic
Warfare/Voice Interceptor (Korean) Course on this date.

      c.  Detachment B, 509th Personnel Services Battalion, Order Number
074-445, dated 15 March 2002, promoting the applicant to sergeant.

      d.  Detachment B, 516th Personnel Service Battalion, memorandum, dated
7 May 2004, stating, in effect, that the applicant's promotion packet for
sergeant under the ACASP was incomplete.

      e.  Department of the Army, 527th Military Intelligence Battalion,
memoranda, dated 24 May and 25 May 2004 recommendations for accelerated
promotion.

      f.  Enlistment Distribution and Assignment System, Electronic Record,
dated 15 June 2004.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s military records show that prior to the period of
enlistment under review, she enlisted in the United States Army Reserve
(USAR) and she was ordered to active duty for training from 8 February to
18 July 1994.  She completed the training requirements and she was awarded
military occupational specialty (MOS) 94B (Cook).



2.  On 14 May 2001, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army in
accordance with Army Regulation 601-210, under ACASP, for 5 years, MOS 98G
(Korean Linguist), a cash bonus in the amount of $19,000, and in the rank
of private first class.

3.  The available evidence shows that on 9 October 2001, the applicant
successfully completed all areas of the ACASP training.  On 15 March 2002,
Orders Number 074-445 were published promoting the applicant from
specialist to sergeant, effective 1 February 2002.

4.  On 7 May 2004, Detachment B, 516th Personnel Services Battalion advised
the commander that the applicant's promotion packet for sergeant was
incomplete.  It did not contain a recommendation from the promotion
authority, the appropriate license/certification (written verification of 8
weeks successful performance in the skill) or the DA Form 3286-68.
Additionally, the commander was advised that the above documents were
required to have been forwarded to the Human Resource Command, Alexandria,
Virginia no later than 6 months from the recommended date of rank (DOR).
Those requests that were older than 6 months, such as the applicant's, also
required submission of a DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of
Military Record).

5.  On 25 May 2004, the battalion commander recommended that the applicant
receive an accelerated promotion to sergeant with an effective DOR and DOR
of 1 February 2002.  The commander stated that the applicant had
successfully completed all of the requirements in accordance with Army
Regulation 601-210 and that the applicant had been promoted to sergeant
prior to her arrival at the 102nd Military Intelligence Battalion.  Her
promotion packet had been misplaced and needed to be reconstructed.

6.  On 13 October 2004, in the processing of this case, the Office of the
Deputy Chief of Staff G-1, Recruiting Policy Branch opined that if the
applicant enlisted under the ACASP for MOS 98G, in the rank of private
first class and later appointment to Sergeant/E-5, the following action
should occur.

      a.  Accelerated promotion to sergeant is authorized upon completion of
all required training (where applicable), 8 weeks of proficiency training
after arrival at the first duty station, and approval of the unit
commander.


      b.  Accelerated promotion to sergeant should coincide with the actual
completion date of the 8 weeks of proficiency training at the first duty
station, unless the unit commander takes action to deny or defer the
accelerated grade.
The Commander must advise the Soldier in writing of the reason for denial
or deferment of the accelerated grade.
      c.  The opinion was based on regulatory guidance outlined in Army
Regulation 601-210, chapter 7, paragraph, 7-11, as well as the review of
the enclosed DD Form 149 and source documents.

      d.  The recommendation is administrative relief for the applicant.
The applicant should be promoted based on regulatory guidance.  The
effective date of promotion should coincide with the date the applicant
completed the proficiency training and the commander (lieutenant colonel or
above) recommended the promotion to sergeant.

7.  On 9 October 2004, the above advisory opinion was referred to the
applicant for comment or rebuttal and she failed to respond.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) 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 with an effective date and DOR on the date all requirements are
met.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s present commander and the ACASP proponent both aver
that the applicant met all the requirements for promotion to pay grade E-5
under the ACASP program and that she should have been promoted to sergeant
on
1 February 2002.

2.  The applicant completed ACASP training on 9 October 2001 and her
battalion recommended her for promotion to sergeant with a DOR and
effective DOR of
1 February 2002.  She should have been promoted to sergeant E-5 on that
date.

3.  It appears that the applicant's promotion packet was lost through no
fault of the applicant.  Her chain of command attempted to reconstruct the
required documents.  However, the request for promotion to sergeant under
the ACASP was submitted later than 6 months from the recommended DOR.
Therefore, the request was never acted upon by the appropriate authority.
The request was submitted to this Board.

4.  Consequently, the applicant’s records should be corrected to show that
she was promoted to sergeant, pay grade E-5 effective and with a DOR of
1 February 2002.  She should receive all due pay and allowances in that
grade effective on 1 February 2002.

5.  The applicant has established no basis for promotion to sergeant with
an effective DOR of 1 February 2001.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

__rjw___  __kwl___  __drt___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board
recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual
concerned be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was
promoted to sergeant, pay grade
E-5 effective and with a DOR of 1 February 2002, with entitlement to all
back pay and allowances that she would have received had she been properly
promoted on 1 February 2002.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
promotion with a DOR of
1 February 2001.



                 Raymond J. Wagner
            ______________________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040006350                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050616                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |(GRANT)                                 |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |131.0000                                |
|2.                      |131.0900                                |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]