RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 16 MARCH 2006
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050017753
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. Jessie B. Strickland | |Analyst |
The following members, a quorum, were present:
| |Mr. James Gunlicks | |Chairperson |
| |Ms. Susan Powers | |Member |
| |Mr. Richard Sayre | |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 his enlistment contract be corrected to
reflect that he would be advanced to the pay grade of E-4 instead of E-3,
as currently reflected and that he be promoted to the pay grade of E-4
effective 1 May 2005.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that he was supposed to be advanced to
the pay grade of E-4 upon approval of his commander due to his enlistment
under the Army Civilian Acquired Skills Program (ACASP). However, because
of the error on his contract, he was not promoted until he had 24 months
time in grade (TIG).
3. The applicant provides a memorandum of support from his commander and a
copy of his advancement to the pay grade of E-4.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. He enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) under the delayed
entry program (DEP) on 7 May 2003, for a period of 8 years. On 11 November
2003, he enlisted in the Regular Army in the pay grade of E-3 under the
ACASP for a period of 6 years and assignment to Fort Drum, New York. As
part of his Statement for Enlistment in paragraph 2, he acknowledged that
his civilian acquired skills as an aircraft power plant repairer was being
recognized for enlistment and that he would be advanced to the pay grade of
E-3 in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210, provided he received a
recommendation from his commander. Promotion is not automatic but depends
on his demonstration of proficiency, skill and conduct.
2. He completed his basic combat training and was transferred to Fort Drum
for assignment to an Air Cavalry Squadron. He was advanced to the pay
grade of E-4 on 1 November 2005.
3. On 1 December 2005, his commander authored a memorandum to the Board
recommending that the applicant’s request be approved.
4. In the processing of this case a staff advisory opinion was obtained
from the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff G-1, Recruiting Policy Branch,
which opined that accelerated promotion to E-4 was authorized upon
completion of all required training (where applicable), 8 weeks of
proficiency training after arrival at the first duty station and approval
by the unit commander. That agency recommended that administrative relief
be granted the applicant and that his date of rank be changed to 1 May
2005. The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for response and
to date no response has been received by the staff of the Board.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. Inasmuch as the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army in the pay grade
of E-3 under the ACASP, it is reasonable to presume that an
administrative error occurred during the processing of his enlistment
contract, which resulted in the entry of E-3 instead of E-4 being entered
in paragraph 2.a. of his Statement for Enlistment.
2. Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice at this time to
correct his enlistment contract in paragraph 2.a. to reflect pay grade E-4
instead of E-3 as currently reflected and that he be promoted to E-4
effective 1 May 2005, with entitlement to all back pay and allowances from
that date.
BOARD VOTE:
___JG __ ___SP __ __RS ___ 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
changing paragraph 2.a. of his Statement for Enlistment to reflect E-4 and
that he be promoted to the pay grade of E-4, effective 1 May 2005, with
entitlement to all back pay and allowances from that date.
_____James Gunlicks______
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR20050017753 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON | |
|DATE BOARDED |20060316 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE |AC Soldier (ENL) on AD |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE |AC Soldier (ENL) on AD |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |AC Soldier (ENL) on AD |
|DISCHARGE REASON |AC Soldier (ENL) on AD |
|BOARD DECISION |(GRANT) |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY |AR 15-185 |
|ISSUES |310/PROM |
|1.131.0000 | |
|2.112.0000 |222/ENL CON |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
-----------------------
[pic]
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000624
a. Paragraph 7-11 (Determination of qualifications and enlistment grades) provides that ACASP applicants must present valid evidence of completion of required civilian training to enlistment authorities. The evidence of record shows the applicant enlisted in the USAR in the grade of E-4 under the ACASP on 4 November 2006 with an assurance of attending the school course for MOS 68V2O (Respiratory Specialist). The evidence of record shows that the online DA Pamphlet 611-21, printed on 12...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011053C070205
In a memorandum for record dated 28 October 2003, the Senior Language Advocate, [U. S. Army Recruiting Command], stated the applicant entered the linguist ACASP at the time of his enlistment. The advisory opinion recommended that the applicant’s date of rank and effective of promotion to pay grade E-5 should coincide with the date he completed the proficiency training and the commander recommended the promotion to E-5. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089419C070403
The applicant requests that her enlistment contract be corrected to reflect that she enlisted under the Army Civilian Acquired Skills Program (ACASP) and that she was authorized an accelerated promotion to the pay grade of E-5 effective 23 October 2002. The Board granted relief in both of the applicant's cases (AR1999020793 and AR1999020967). Notwithstanding the advisory opinion from the G-1, the Board is convinced based on the evidence presented and the evidence of record that the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004105778C070208
The applicant requests that his enlistment contract be corrected to reflect that he enlisted under the Army Civilian Acquired Skills Program (ACASP). Army Regulation 601-210 further states that personnel approved for enlistment under this program will be enlisted in the pay grade of E-4 based on possession of a bachelor’s degree and may be advanced to the pay grade of E-5 contingent on the commander’s approval. Accordingly, given the support of his chain of command, the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100022728
The applicant requests reconsideration of her request that her enlistment contract be corrected to show she was enlisted in the Army Civilian Acquired Skills Program (ACASP) for military occupational specialty (MOS) 91K (Biological Science Assistant) with an additional skill identifier (ASI) of P9 and that she be promoted to sergeant/pay grade E-5 as provided for under the ACASP for MOS 91K2OP9 with entitlement to all back pay and allowances. The applicant states the Army Board for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040001920C070208
After arriving at the USARIEM, he discovered that other individuals who were selected for the same program, enlisted under the same program, and had similar credentials as his were granted accelerated promotions to the pay grade of E-5 by the Board, based on the same circumstances that occurred in his case. Army Regulation 601-210 further states that personnel approved for enlistment under this program will be enlisted in the pay grade of E-4 based on possession of a bachelor’s degree and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060006752C070205
William Crain | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The opinion states that if the applicant enlisted under the ACASP for MOS 91D with an entry grade of E-3 and later appointment to E-4, then accelerated promotion to E-4 was authorized upon completion of all required training. That office recommended, in effect, administrative relief of the applicant's request for his date of rank and effective date of promotion...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004009C070206
Della R. Trimble | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant's request for correction of enlistment data, if approved by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), results in a change to the applicant's pay grade. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by granting de facto status for the period of service that she...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012789
What can be established with certainty is that the applicant enlisted in the DEP for an MOS which provided for accelerated promotion to pay grade E-4, and enlisted in the RA for an MOS which provided for an accelerated promotion to pay grade E-5. The applicant's records do not contain a recommendation by his commander that he be given accelerated promotion to pay grade E-5. Notwithstanding the ODCS, G-1 advisory opinion and in view of the foregoing, there is insufficient evidence in which...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010545
The evidence of record confirms the applicant enlisted under the provisions of the ACASP and that upon completion of all required 98G MOS training, she was reassigned to her first duty station, where she arrived for duty on 17 July 2004. Given the recommendation of the applicant's chain of command and the revised unit policy, it would be appropriate to grant partial relief in this case by adjusting the applicant's SGT promotion effective date and date of rank to 30 September 2004, which was...