PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           29 September 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999021919

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas A. Pagan		Member	
	Ms. Meta Waller		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that his DD Form 214 and discharge orders be corrected to reflect his rank as Sergeant First Class (SFC).

3.  The applicant states that he was promoted to SFC on orders #162-38 dated 11 June 1997 and he pinned on the rank on 1 July 1997.  Supporting evidence is as listed on the DD Form 149.

4.  Counsel requests that the Board correct the applicant’s records to reflect he was separated as an SFC.

5.  The applicant's military records show that, after having had prior service, he enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 October 1989.

6.  Orders published 11 June 1997 promoted the applicant to SFC effective          1 July 1997.  The orders state that Staff Sergeants (SSG) promoted to SFC who do not have Advanced Non-Commissioned Officer Course (ANCOC) credit are promoted conditionally.  Those soldiers who receive a conditional promotion will have their orders revoked and their names removed from the centralized list if they fail to meet the ANCOC requirement.

7.  Effective 1 July 1997, the applicant was promoted to SFC.  There is no evidence of record to show the applicant completed ANCOC.

8.  On 8 September 1997, the applicant was discharged upon completion of his required active service.  His DD Form 214 shows his rank and grade as SSG,   E-6.  His discharge orders show his rank as SSG.  Block 12a (erroneously) shows he entered active duty that period on 2 September 1986 and block 12c shows his net active service that period as 11 years and 7 days.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 prescribes the enlisted promotions and reductions function of the military personnel system.  In pertinent part it states that completion of ANCOC is required for promotion to SFC.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board concludes that there is an administrative error on the applicant’s DD Form 214.  After his break in service he reenlisted on 17 October 1989; therefore, block 12a should reflect this date, making block 12c 7 years, 10 months and 22 days

2.  The Board concludes that there is no error or injustice concerning his rank and grade.  The applicant’s orders stated promotion to SFC was conditional upon meeting the ANCOC requirement.  The applicant did not meet the ANCOC requirement.  Although it appears the promotion orders were never revoked, that does not negate the invalidation of the promotion through his non-attendance at ANCOC.

3.  In view of the foregoing, it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That the applicant’s DD Form 214 for the period ending 8 September 1997, block 12a be corrected to read 1989 10 17 and block 12c be corrected to read 7 years, 10 months and 22 days.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__fne___  __tap___  __mw____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Fred N. Eichorn
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999021919	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990929	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.