IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	   23 February 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090013040 


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 reconsideration of an earlier request for constructive service credit.  He also requests that the original proceedings be removed from his military records.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the Board used the incorrect Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) in denying his original request for constructive credit.  He contends that his branch is Signal not Medical and he was utilizing the information contained within Federal law that considers a specialty branch, like Signal, to be technical in nature.  He points out that DODI 1312.03 (Service Credit for Commissioned Officers) applies in his case and in the "Other" category there are guidelines for constructive credit based on a requirement for higher education in a particular field.

3.  The applicant states that he has no knowledge of what his branch needed at that time in the form of officers in rank higher than second lieutenant.  He goes on to state that the only specialty he knew of in his basic branch that definitely required a higher level of education or rank is that of Field Artillery 53, a specialty similar to his civilian occupation as a system administrator and the job he conducted for 3 years in V Corps Artillery G-6.  He claims that this is a branch he was attempting to get in to while in school through a pilot program for experienced prior-enlisted Soldiers turned officer but was limited to Active Component officers.  He recently found that the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) has a program for constructive credit of qualified information technology expertise in the civilian sector to be applied to this field.  Had he known any of this when he first applied for his commission, it is possible that his application may have been different from what was originally submitted.  This is a failure inherent in the system as a whole, not the individual.

4.  The applicant states that he applied for a waiver for the Basic Officer Leader Course (BOLC) II because Army regulations consider it a 1O-level course, that he completed the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course and held a position equal to or higher than that of a platoon sergeant/leader, and that the basic skills taught in BOLC II are equal to those taught in the squad-level Primary Leadership Development Course.  He goes on to state that he was approved all the way to Headquarters, Department of the Army, but ultimately denied because a denial from a "schools commander" meant more than the evidence at hand and the regulation he was quoting.  He claims the USAR regulations are woefully out of date and DODI's do not seem to be available at most administrative offices, let alone for the common Soldier.  He states the appointment board was conducted at a time when Reserve officer manning was extremely low in positions from first lieutenant to major.  He believes the request in his appointment packet justified that a branch review be based on whether it had a need for him at a higher grade or if it had a need for him wherein it could have applied constructive credit in the form of 1/2 year for each 1 year of advanced education and experiences to a maximum of 3 years as it applies to his records and the DODI in the "Other" category.

5.  The applicant provides an undated letter in support of his request for reconsideration.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20080004704 on 17 September 2008.

2.  The applicant's argument that the incorrect DODI cite (i.e., DODI 6000.13) was used in Docket Number AR20080004704 is correct and will be addressed by this Board.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 11 September 1987 for a period of 4 years.  He successfully completed his training as a unit-level communications maintainer.  He remained on active duty through a series of reenlistments and extensions.  He was honorably discharged on 3 November 1999 upon completion of his required service.

4.  The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he held a signal support systems specialist military occupational specialty (MOS) for 7 years and that he held a unit-level communications maintainer MOS for 4 years and 9 months.

5.  On 4 November 1999, the applicant enlisted in the Michigan Army National Guard (MIARNG) for 1 year in pay grade E-5.

6.  The applicant's National Guard Bureau Form 22 (Report of Separation of Service) shows that he was honorably discharged from the MIARNG on 19 January 2000 to "enlist in any component of the Armed Forces."

7.  The applicant's records indicate that he enlisted in the USAR on 19 January 2000.  His records also show that he was promoted to staff sergeant (E-6) on 1 August 2001, he was promoted to sergeant first class (E-7) on 1 December 2003, and he was promoted to master sergeant (E-8) on 1 February 2007 while he was a member of the USAR.

8.  On 1 October 2007, the applicant accepted an appointment as a second lieutenant in the USAR Signal Corps, area of concentration (AOC) 25A.

9.  Records show the applicant contacted USAR officials requesting an adjustment of his date of rank or constructive credit.  The applicant was informed that after a review of his request and his appointment application packet, there was no substantial justification to seek a Department of the Army waiver for alteration of his date of rank.

10.  The applicant was promoted to first lieutenant effective 31 March 2009.

11.  Paragraph 6.1 of DODI 1312.03 states that the entry grade and date of rank or promotion service credit in grade of a commissioned officer (other than an officer in the health professions) shall be determined by the entry-grade credit awarded upon appointment.  The entry-grade credit that is awarded shall be the sum of the prior commissioned service allowed and the amount of constructive service credit allowed.  A period of time shall be counted only once when computing credit.

12.  Paragraph 6.1.2 of DODI 1312.03 states that the purpose of constructive service credit is to provide grade and date of rank comparability for a person who begins commissioned service after obtaining the additional education, training, or experience required for appointment, designation, or assignment as a commissioned officer in a professional field relative to a contemporary who began commissioned service immediately after obtaining a baccalaureate degree.

13.  Paragraph 6.1.2.4.3.2 of DODI 1312.03 states that entry-grade credit for special experience or unique qualifications, as determined by the Secretary of the Military Department concerned, in those cases in which advanced education beyond the baccalaureate degree level is required as a prerequisite for appointment, assignment, or designation in a particular commissioned officer category shall not exceed 1/2 year for each year, up to a maximum of 3 years of credit.

14.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 611-21 (Military Occupational Classification and Structure) states, in pertinent part, that Department of the Army Pamphlet 600-3 (The Army Personnel Development System) lists qualifications for entry and professional development in the Signal Corps.  This pamphlet also states, in pertinent part, that no special qualifications are required for award of AOC 25A (Signal Operations).

15.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 600-3 states, in pertinent part, that no special civilian education is required for entry in the Signal Corps.  A bachelor's degree is required prior to promotion to captain.

16.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/
Records) prescribes the policies governing the official military personnel file (OMPF), the military personnel records jacket, the career management individual file, and Army personnel qualification records.  Table 2-1 of the regulation provides, in pertinent part, that the DD Form 149 (ABCMR application) and allied documents will be filed in the restricted section of the OMPF.

17.  Paragraph 2-4 of Army Regulation 600-8-104 states that once placed in the OMPF, the document becomes a permanent part of that file.  The document will not be removed from a fiche or moved to another part of the fiche unless directed by appropriate officials.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that DODI 1312.03 applies in his case and there are guidelines for constructive credit based on a requirement for higher education in a particular field.

2.  However, the governing regulations state that constructive service credit may be awarded only if such advanced education is required as a prerequisite for original appointment as a commissioned officer in a particular officer category.  The governing regulations also state that no special qualifications are required for award of AOC 25A and that no special civilian education is required for appointment in the Signal Corps.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request for constructive service credit.

3.  The applicant's request that the original proceedings be removed from his military records because the incorrect DODI cite was used to deny his request was noted.  However, the governing regulation states that the DD Form 149 and allied documents will be filed in the restricted section of the OMPF and that once placed in the OMPF the document becomes a permanent part of that file.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X___  ___X____  ___X____  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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20080004704, dated 17 September 2008.



      _________X_________
               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)                                         AR20090013040



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090013040



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1