IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  20 September 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110005154 


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 his earlier petition to the Board requesting an enlistment grade of sergeant first class/E-7 (SFC/E-7).  

2.  The applicant states he is requesting a review of the information he is providing and that he be given a favorable result based in the unprofessional way the United States Army Recruiting Command (USAREC) and U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) handled his enlistment processing.  He argues the governing regulation fails to prohibit award of a grade determination of SFC/E-7. 

3.  The applicant provides a DD Form 1966, dated 20 February 2007, and a DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document-Armed Forces of the United States), dated 4 February 1984, documenting his enlistment in the Regular Army (RA) on 21 August 1986, in support of his application.  

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 AR20090018089, on 8 June 2010.



2.  During the original review of the case, the Board found the evidence of record showed the applicant enlisted in the RA on 20 February 2007 as a staff sergeant/E-6 (SSG/E-6) for a period of 6 years and 11 weeks.  It further noted the applicant signed the contract indicating he was fully aware of the conditions of the enlistment.  It further concluded the DD Form 1966 clearly indicated a grade determination of SSG/E-6 was approved and the corresponding grade determination control number is recorded in the form.  

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement as new evidence.  He argues that he pointed out the following errors on the DD form 1966 to his recruiter and was informed the errors did not matter and would change nothing:

* Block B (Prior Service) - Indicates only 180 days of prior service when he in fact had a total of 8 years
* Block 14 ((Valid Driver’s License) - Contains an incorrect expiration date for his Oklahoma driver’s license
* Block 22 (Education) - Contains the incorrect high school and date he attended

4.  The applicant further states he only signed the contract because the recruiter stated the only way for him to reenter the RA was as a SSG/E-6 because the Army wound not reclassify him as a SFC/E-7, which is the rank he held until 2 February 2007.  

5.  On 20 February 2007, while serving as a SFC/E-7 in the United States Army Reserve (USAR), in the primary military occupational specialty (PMOS) 
13M (MLRS/HIMARS Crew Member), the applicant enlisted in the RA.  

6.  The applicant’s record contains a DD Form 1966, dated 2 February 2007, completed during the applicant’s February 2007 enlistment processing.  This document contains an entry in Section VI (Remarks) confirming an administrative waiver was approved by the Deputy Director of Recruiting Operations on 
23 January 2007, and the corresponding grade determination authority control number is recorded in the contract.  

7.  A DA Form 3286 (Statement of Understanding), dated 2 February 2007, also completed during the applicant’s enlistment processing contains the applicant’s acknowledgment of the terms of his enlistment in the RA.  It indicates he accepted these terms which included his agreement to receive training in MOS 19D (Cavalry Scout).  



8.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) prescribes eligibility criteria governing the enlistment of persons, with or without prior Service (PS), into the Regular Army (RA), the Army Reserve (AR), and the Army National Guard (ARNG).  Chapter 3 provides guidance on the enlistment of prior service (PS) applicants. Paragraph 3-17 provides guidance on enlistment pay grade and terms of enlistment for RA applicants with PS.  It states, in pertinent part, that if the current MOS structure does not support entry in former PMOS for members in grades E-7 and above who are current members of the Reserve Component (RC) and still desires to obtain a new MOS will be reduced in grade/rank based on established retention management  business rules.  The applicant must accept retraining in the MOS provided by USAREC.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s request for reconsideration of his earlier petition requesting an enlistment grade of SFC/E-7 in conjunction with his 20 February 2007 enlistment in the RA and his new argument/evidence has been carefully considered.  However, there remains an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief.  

2.  By regulation, when the current MOS structure does not support enlistment of RC members, in grades of E-7 and above, in the RA in their current PMOS and retraining is required, the member will be reduced in grade/rank based on established retention management rules and the applicant must accept retraining in the MOS provided by USAREC.

3.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant accepted enlistment in the rank/grade of SSG/E-6 and retraining in MOS 19D which is in compliance with the regulatory guidance for RA enlistment of prior service current members of the RC in the grade of E-7 and above.   The DD Form 1966 and DA Form 3286 completed during his enlistment processing confirms the applicant agreed to enlistment in the rank/grade of SSG/E-6 and for retraining in MOS 19D.

4.  Even had the applicant questioned his recruiter on errors in his enlistment processing forms, he admits he never denied signing the contract.  Therefore, given he clearly agreed to enlist in the grade/rank of SSG/E-6 and retraining in MOS 19D, even if there were administrative errors in the information contained in the enlistment documents, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support changing his enlistment grade at this time.  



5.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement and/or that would support amendment of the original Board decision in this case.  

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 AR20090018089, dated 8 June 2010.



      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20110005154



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110005154



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1