IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  15 July 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090021233 


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, in effect, correction of her record to show she was promoted to sergeant (SGT)/E-5, followed by appointment as a commissioned officer based on her education.

2.  The applicant states while serving in the Army she was to be promoted to SGT, but she had not been promoted when she was discharged.  She further states she had 120 [college] credits when she entered the Army, but not a bachelor's degree, and she was not given an officer's rank.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and three academic transcripts.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to 


timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 26 January 1991.  She entered active duty for training (ADT) on 7 February 1991, she was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 76V (Materiel Storage and Handling Specialist), and she was released from ADT on 3 June 1991.

3.  On 25 July 1991, she enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for a period of 4 years in the rank/grade of private first class (PFC)/E-3.  On 26 October 1992, she was honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), paragraph 4-24b(4), by reason of physical disability without severance pay.  She completed
1 year, 6 months, and 19 days of active military service.  She was discharged in the rank/grade of PFC/E-3.

4.  The record is void of documentation indicating the applicant was ever recommended for or promoted to SGT/E-5 or that she applied for appointment as a commissioned officer.

5.  The DD Form 1966 (Record of Military Processing - Armed Forces of the United States) series of forms completed at the time of the applicant's enlistment in the USAR show she was authorized enlistment in pay grade E-3 in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program), Table 2-3, Rule E.

6.  A DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) shows, on 8 February 1991, the applicant was advanced to private first class (PFC)/E-3 with a date of rank (DOR) of
26 January 1991, the date of her enlistment in the USAR.  This form also shows the authority for advancement was Army Regulation 601-210, Table 2-3, Rule E and that she had completed 70 semester hours prior to [entry on active duty].

7.  The DD Form 1966/3 completed at the time of the applicant's enlistment in the RA shows she was authorized pay grade E-3 in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210, Table 3-3, Rule A.

8.  A DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows in item 17 (Civilian Education and Military Schools) the applicant completed 70 semester hours at Ulster County Community College.  


9.  The applicant provides three academic transcripts.

	a.  An unofficial transcript from The Berkeley Schools shows she completed several business courses.  This transcript does not indicate how many semester hours she completed.

	b.  A transcript from Allan Hancock College shows she completed 36 units and received 52.6 transfer credits for courses completed at The Berkeley Schools.  She was awarded an Associate in Arts degree.  

	c.  A transcript from Ulster County Community College shows she completed 41 semester hours and received 29 transfer credits from Allan Hancock College for a total of 70 semester hours.  She was awarded an Associate in Science degree.

10.  The version of Army Regulation 601-210 in effect when the applicant enlisted stated persons enlisting in the RA or USAR without prior service would be enlisted in pay grade E-1 unless they met certain criteria.  

	a.  Table 2-3 of this regulation provided the criteria for authorizing enlistment in a higher pay grade.  Table 2-3, Rule E provided that applicants who had successfully completed sixty or more semester hours at an accredited college or university could enlist in pay grade E-3.  

	b.  Table 3-3 of this regulation provided the criteria authorizing enlistment in a higher pay grade for individuals with prior military service.  Rule A provided that individuals who had taken part in an initial active duty for training (IADT) program, had been awarded an MOS, and enlisted within 24 months from the date released from IADT would retain the pay grade held at the time of their release from IADT, but not less than private (PV2)/E-2.

11.  The version of Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), in effect at the time of the applicant's enlistment, stated that advancement to specialist (SPC)/E-4 required 26 months time in service and
6 months time in grade.  12 months time in service and 3 months time in grade could be waived.  Advancement to SGT/E-5 required selection by a promotion board, 36 months time in service, 8 months time in grade, and completion of the Primary Leadership Development Course.  Time in service and time in grade requirements could be reduced to 18 months and 4 months, respectively, for Soldiers who had been recommended to compete in the secondary zone.  The basic active service date (BASD) is used to determine time in service.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record does not support the applicant's request for correction of her record to show she was promoted to SGT/E-5 or to show she was appointed as a commissioned officer.

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant enlisted in the RA as a PFC/E-3 on 25 July 1991.  Her BASD, adjusted for her USAR service, was 28 March 1991.  With this BASD, the applicant was eligible for automatic advancement to SPC/E-4 on 28 May 1993.  The earliest date she could have been advanced to SPC/E-4 with a waiver for time in service was 28 May 1992.  There is no evidence showing a commander with waiver authority elected to waive the time in service requirement and advance her to SPC/E-4 prior to her discharge.  She was subsequently discharged before reaching her eligibility date for automatic advancement.

3.  Because the applicant was not advanced to SPC/E-4, she was not eligible for consideration for promotion to SGT/E-5.  Therefore, she is not entitled to correction of her record to show she was promoted to SGT/E-5.

4.  Appointment as a commissioned officer is not based solely on the amount of civilian education an individual has completed.  There is no evidence of record and the applicant has not provided any evidence showing she applied for appointment as a commissioned officer or that she enrolled in or completed any military programs that would have resulted in eligibility for appointment as an officer.  Accordingly, she is not entitled to correction of her record to show she was appointed as a commissioned officer.

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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      ___________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)                                         AR20090021233



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090021233



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1