RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  29 March 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060016615 


	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. Gerard W. Schwartz

Acting Director

Mrs. Phyllis M. Perkins 

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Lester Echols 

Chairperson

Ms. Linda M. Barker

Member

Mr. Michael J. Flynn

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 his rank of sergeant first class/pay grade E-7 be reinstated.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his rank was reduced after he transferred from active duty to the United States Army Reserves (USAR) for personal reasons.  He further states that according to MILPER Message 05-143, mobilized Soldiers reentering back on active duty will do so without a grade determination and will keep their present rank.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a letter from a Congressman, dated 16 November 2006; a list of recruiting officials; a list of questions; 203rd Military Intelligence Battalion (Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland) Orders Number
05-237-00006, dated 25 August 2005; MILPER Message Number 05-143; DD Form 368 (Request For Conditional Release), dated 13 June 2006; DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 13 June 2006; DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); an e-mail message; DD Form 4/1 (Enlistment/ Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States); DA Form 3286, (Annex A) [Statement of Understanding], dated 3 October 2006; DA Form 3286, (Annex B) [ Statement of Enlisted United States Program], dated 5 October 2006; and United States Army Garrison (Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland), Orders Number 173-0001, dated 22 June 2004, in support of this application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's military records show that he enlisted in the USAR and was ordered to active duty on 25 August 2005.  Records further show that the applicant was honorably released from active duty on 30 June 2006 for completion of required service and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).  The highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was sergeant first class/pay grade E-7.

2.  Department of the Army, 203rd Military Intelligence Battalion Orders Number 05-237-00006, dated 25 August 2005, show the applicant was ordered to active duty for a period of one year and mobilized to Iraq.  





3.  DD Form 368, dated 13 June 2006, shows the applicant submitted a request for conditional release to enlist in the United States Army.  On 13 June 2006, the appropriate approval authority granted the applicant's request for conditional release.  

4.  The applicant's records contain a DA Form 4187, dated 13 June 2006, which show the applicant requested enlistment into the Regular Army.  The applicant's commander recommended approval of the applicant's request.  There is no evidence in the available records which show the DA Form 4187 was approved or that the applicant enlisted in the Army in June 2006.

5.  Department of Army, United States Army Garrison Orders Number 173-0001, dated 22 June 2006, shows the applicant was released from active duty in the pay grade of sergeant first class/E-7 and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) on 30 June 2006.  At this point, the applicant was no longer a mobilized Soldier.

6.  The applicant's records contain a DD Form 4/1, dated 5 October 2006, which shows he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years and in the pay grade staff sergeant /E-6.  This form was authenticated by the applicant.

7.  The Chief, Force Alignment Division of United States Army Human Resources Command (Alexandria, Virginia) provided a comprehensive advisory opinion which stated that after an extensive review of the applicant's enlistment contract, dated 5 October 2006, it was determined that the applicant's rank/pay grade of staff sergeant/E-6 was correct.  

8.  The applicant provided a five-page written response to the Human Resources Command opinion.  The applicant essentially states that he was a mobilized Reserve Soldier on 13 June 2006 and was told that he wasn't supposed to demobilize until 30 June 2006.  The applicant contends that his career counselor failed to complete his transfer packet for returning to active duty by 30 June 2006 and erroneously transferred his packet to a recruiter.

9.  The applicant also contends that he signed his enlistment contract under duress and false pretense.  He continues that he signed the contract because he had lost his civilian employment and he thought he could return to active duty without losing his rank.

10.  The applicant argues that at the time he executed his reenlistment contract, he actually left because the contract enlisted him in the rank of staff sergeant/pay grade E-6.  The applicant continues that he was informed that there was no sergeant first class/pay grade E-7 positions available and that if the allegations regarding his career counselor were determined to be true then he may be able to regain his E-7 rank.  The applicant concluded that he signed the contract enlisting him the US Army in the rank of staff sergeant/pay grade E-6 and that he is experiencing difficulties wearing E-6 rank among young Soldier's due to the neglect of his career counselor.

11.  MILPER Message 05-143 (Enlistment of Mobilized United States Army Reserve (USAR) or Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) Soldiers into the Regular Army), dated 16 June 2005, provides clarification of grade determination policies for mobilized Reserve Component Soldiers.  This message states that grade determination is not required for mobilized Reserve Component Soldiers and that these Soldiers will enlist into the Regular Army at their current rank.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant request that his pay grade be corrected to show he enlisted in the pay grade E-7. 

2.  Evidence shows the applicant's unit was mobilized for Iraq and he was ordered to active duty for a period of one year.  After reporting to Iraq, the applicant submitted a request for conditional release due to personal reasons and returned home.    

3.  Records clearly show that the applicant was a member of the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) and not in a mobilized status when he enlisted in the US Army.  The MILPER Message provided by the applicant states that grade determination does not apply to mobilized Soldiers.  The applicant was not mobilized at the time of his enlistment in the US Army; therefore, he is not eligible for enlistment in the grade of sergeant first class/pay grade E-7.

4.  The applicant further argues that his career counselor provided him with false advice and did not properly process his request for returning to active duty.  There is no evidence in the available record and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence showing that his conditional release and subsequent enlistment in the Army was erroneously processed.  As a result, there is no basis for this contention.

5.  The applicant also argues that he was forced to sign his enlistment contract.  The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence which shows that the enlistment contract was not completed in accordance with applicable regulations.  
6.  Additionally, the applicant admits that he chose to return to active duty based on the fact that he lost his civilian employment.  The enlistment contract contains the applicant's signature and clearly shows that he was enlisting in the pay grade E-6.

7.  Based on the foregoing, the applicant is not entitled to correction of his records and his rank of staff sergeant/pay grade E-6 at the time of his enlistment in the Army is correct. 

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__LE____  _MJF___  __LMB___  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.





_Lester Echols ____
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
YYYYMMDD
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.