IN THE CASE OF:	  

	BOARD DATE:	  03 June 2008

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080002546 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that her date of rank (DOR) for promotion to the pay grade of E-5 be backdated to on or about 11 January 2005.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she enlisted under the Army Civilian Acquired Skills Program (ACASP) as a Spanish/American Linguist with the condition that she be promoted to the pay grade of E-5 after completing all required training and demonstrating the appropriate level of proficiency, skill, and conduct.  She goes on to state that she completed all of her training and demonstrated the appropriate level of proficiency; however, her commander denied her promotion because her Top Secret clearance had not been completed.  She goes on to state that had she been assigned to a regular Army Military Intelligence site she would have been promoted with a Secret clearance; however, due to delays beyond her control, her clearance took longer than normal and her promotion was delayed for 3 years.  She also states that she pursued redress through every avenue possible until she was finally promoted, albeit later than she was promised in her contract.   

3.  The applicant provides a three-page explanation of her application, a copy of her ACASP agreement (DA Form 3286-68), a copy of her Language Proficiency Questionnaire (DA Form 330), a copy of two Certificates of Achievement, three course completion certificates, a copy of her assignment orders, an excerpt from her unit standing operating procedures regarding the processing of ACASP packets in the unit, a copy of an incomplete DA Form 4187 requesting advancement to the pay grade of E-5, copies of two memoranda for record regarding the applicant’s promotion, copies of five counseling records regarding her performance and proficiency, copies of response to her Congressional Representatives regarding the delay of her promotion, a copy of a response to her Inspector General Action Request (IGAR), a copy of her Certificate of Promotion, a copy of a memorandum from her commander to the Commanding General of INSCOM regarding ACASP Issue Resolution, and a copy of a statement of non-availability pertaining to another Soldier.     

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 January 2004 in the pay grade of E-4 for a period of 4 years under the ACASP as a Spanish/American Linguist, for training as an electronic warfare/signal intelligence specialist, the College Loan Repayment Program, and a $17,000 cash enlistment bonus.     

2.  At the time of her enlistment she signed a Statement for Enlistment under the ACASP in which she acknowledged that she was enlisting as a Spanish/American linguist and that she would be advanced to the pay grade of E-5, provided she received a recommendation from her commander and that she understood that her promotion was not automatic, but dependent on her demonstration of proficiency, skill, and conduct.   

3.  The applicant completed her training and was transferred to a military intelligence battalion at Lackland Air Force Base, San Antonio, Texas on 8 November 2004.  The applicant was assigned for duty at the National Security Agency/Central Security Service, an Army and Air Force jointly manned facility.    
4.  The applicant did not get promoted to the pay grade of E-5 until 13 February 2007, due to delays in obtaining a Top Secret security clearance.

5.  On 11 December 2007, the acting command inspector general (IG) for INSCOM (Intelligence and Security Command) at Fort Belvoir dispatched a memorandum to the applicant informing her to apply to this Board for resolution of her DOR issue.

6.  In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G1, Recruiting Policy Branch which opines, in effect, that the applicant had completed all of the required training, was demonstrating outstanding performance and proficiency in her duties, and was denied her advancement because her security clearance level had not been adjudicated, which was beyond the Soldier’s control.  Officials at that office recommended that her DOR be changed to 19 March 2005.  The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant and she concurred with the advisory opinion as written.
7.  On 29 January 2008, the applicant reenlisted for a period of 3 years and stabilization at her unit of assignment.
    
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that her promotion to the pay grade of E-5 was unjustly delayed has been noted and appears to have merit.  At the time the applicant enlisted under the ACASP, she was informed that she would be advanced to the pay grade of E-5 upon completion of her required training; a demonstration of her proficiency, skill, and conduct and a favorable recommendation from her commander.   

2.  However, after completing her training, she was assigned to a unit requiring her to have a Top Secret security clearance and because the adjudication of her clearance was delayed, she was denied advancement to the pay grade of E-5 until 13 February 2007, over 3 years after she had enlisted and demonstrated that she could perform at the E-5 level. 

3.  While there may have been internal unit policies which required her security clearance to be adjudicated before she could be promoted under the ACASP, the applicant made a contract with the Army and she met all of the requirements specified in the contract on 19 March 2005.  

4.  Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice to correct her DOR to show that she was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 19 March 2005, with entitlement to all back pay and allowances from that date. 

BOARD VOTE:

__XXX __  __XXX__  __XXX__   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 that the applicant was promoted to the pay grade of E-5, effective and with a DOR of 19 March 2005, and entitlement to all back pay and allowances from that date.



      ___        XXX                ___
                CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080002546



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080002546



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1