RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           4 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050000184


      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             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Mark D. Manning               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Larry C. Bergquist            |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carmen Duncan                 |     |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, in effect, that her sergeant/E-5 (SGT/E-5)
promotion effective date and date of rank be corrected.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, she enlisted in the Army under the
Army Civilian Acquired Skills Program (ACASP), which stated she would be
promoted to SGT/E-5 after eight weeks at her first duty station.  However,
her chain of command refused to honor her contract because they did not
agree with it.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of her
application:  Enlistment Contract; Military Occupational Specialty (MOS)
Orders; Reassignment Orders; Defense Language Proficiency Test (DLPT)
Scores; and Inspector General (IG) Inquiry.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  As of the date of her application to the Board, the applicant was
serving on active duty as a SGT/E-5.

2.  The applicant’s enlistment contract (DD Form 4) confirms that she
enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 1 August 2001.  A
Statement for Enlistment (DA Form 3286-63) included with the enlistment
contract verifies that she was enlisting for the ACASP in military
occupational specialty (MOS) 98G (Electronic Warfare Signal Intelligence
Analyst (Russian Linguist)), and that she would be advanced to the pay
grade of E-5 in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210 provided she
received a recommendation from her unit commander.

3.  A Defense Language Institute (DLI), Washington Office memorandum, dated
25 November 2003, confirms the applicant completed language training on
24 May 2002, and was immediately assigned as a permanent party augmentee
staff member of the DLI Washington Office, with duty at Fort Myer,
Virginia.

4.  On 24 May 2004, the IG, United States Army Intelligence and Security
Command, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, responded to an inquiry from the
applicant.  The IG informed the applicant her promotion to SGT/E-5 was not
processed properly at her initial duty assignment at Fort Myer.  However,
he indicated that Human Resources Command (HRC) could only process
promotions back six months, and that her correct promotion date exceeded
that six month period.  The IG advised the applicant to apply to this Board
for further correction of her SGT/E-5 date of rank.

5.  United States Army Garrison, Fort George G. Meade Orders Number 093-81,
dated 3 April 2003, authorized the applicant’s promotion to SGT/E-5
effective and with a date of rank of 1 March 2003.

6.  In connection with the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was
obtained from the Senior Army Recruiting Policy and Programs Manager,
Recruiting Policy Branch, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff G-1.  This
Department of the Army (DA) recruiting official confirmed the applicant
enlisted under the ACASP and was entitled to promotion to SGT/E-5 after
completion of all training and eight weeks of proficiency training after
arrival at her first duty station.  He further confirmed that absent a unit
commander action to deny, or defer the accelerated promotion, the
applicant’s SGT/E-5 promotion date and date of rank should have coincided
with her actual completion of eight weeks of proficiency training at her
first duty station.  This official recommended administrative relief be
provided in the applicant’s case.  On 31 January 2005, the applicant
concurred with the G-1 advisory opinion.

7.  Army Regulation 601-210 prescribes the Army’s enlistment policy.
Chapter 7, Section I, provides policy and guidance for implementing the
ACASP.  It states, in pertinent part, that promotion to the accelerated
grade and award of the MOS authorized by the enlistment agreement will be
made either with approval of the unit commander or by the training
commander for active Army personnel, after successful completion of all
training.  The accelerated grade will be awarded to qualified soldiers
without regard to time in grade, time in service, or promotion allocation.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim that her promotion effective date and date of
rank to SGT/E-5 should be corrected was carefully considered and found to
have merit.

2.  The evidence of record confirms that the applicant enlisted under the
provisions of the ACASP and that the terms of her enlistment authorized her
accelerated promotion to SGT/E-5 upon completion of all required training
and certification of proficiency after eight weeks at her first duty
station.

3.  The record further confirms the applicant was assigned to her first
duty station upon completion of her training on 24 May 2002.  Therefore,
absent a formal action to deny, or defer her accelerated promotion by her
unit commander, it would be appropriate to correct her SGT/E-5 promotion
effective date and date of rank to 19 July 2002, which is the date she
completed eight weeks at Fort Myer.

4.  In accordance with the terms of the applicant’s enlistment contract, it
would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s record to show her SGT/E-5
promotion effective date and date of rank as 19 July 2002, and to provide
her all back pay and allowances due as a result.

BOARD VOTE:

___MDM   ___LCB__  __CD___  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all
Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by
showing her sergeant/E-5 promotion effective date and date of rank as 19
July 2002, and by providing her all back pay and allowances due as a
result.





            ____Mark D. Manning___
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050000184                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/10/04                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schneider                           |
|ISSUES         1.  21   |102.0700                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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