MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           7 September 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000034925

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Richard H. Allen		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Aldolphi		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Thomas B. Redfern III		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, enlistment in the Army Reserve (USAR) in pay grade E-7, military occupational specialty (MOS) 38A40 (Civil Affairs Sergeant) versus pay grade E-5, MOS 38A20 (Civil Affairs Specialist). 

APPLICANT STATES:  In essence, that the Military Entrance Personnel Processing (MEPP) station in Raleigh, North Carolina improperly gave him a grade determination of E-5, without taking into consideration his extensive military educational courses (Military Education Level (MEL)) and experience as a commissioned officer.  He entered the Army Guard/Reserve (AGR) on 
14 March 1999.  He met or exceeded the requirements for enlistment in pay grade E-7.  He is qualified for and is currently serving in an E-7 position.  He has advised a member of the Board’s staff that he has recently been selected for promotion to pay grade E-6 (actual date of promotion depends on meeting the Department of the Army announced promotion cutoff score for his grade and MOS).  He submits extracts of his military records, prior DD Forms 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty/Certificates of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), recommendations from his chain of command and his enlistment contract. 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He had prior enlisted and commissioned officer service in the United States Marine Corps Reserve (USMCR) from 26 March 1977 through 15 February 1987. The exact dates of his enlisted service and the highest rank he attained are not known.  He served on active duty as a commissioned officer in the USMC from 15 May 1982 through 15 February 1987.  At the time of his release from the USMC, at the expiration of his term of service, he held the rank of first lieutenant (1LT) and his officer specialty in the USMC was as a Field Artillery Officer.  He had completed a Field Artillery Officer Basic course in 1983 and a Nuclear Weapons Officer course in 1984.

On 14 February 1987 he was appointed and commissioned as a 1LT, USAR, Ordnance Corps, with a concurrent call to active duty.  His officer specialty was 91D (Munitions Material Management).  The 2-day disparity between his release from the USMC and the appointment in the USAR is not explained.  He was promoted to the rank of captain on 1 March 1988.  

His earlier assignments between 1987 and 1991 were with an Ordnance battalion, with duty in specialty 91D.  He completed the Ordnance Advanced Officer Course and the Airborne school in 1987.  In 1989, he completed the Combined Arms and Services Staff School (CAS 3).  

In 1991, the applicant was assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, with duty at the US Army Special Operations Command. He served as a plans officer and a team leader in various psychological operations and civil affairs assignments.  He completed additional schooling in Psychological Operations in 1992, a Regional Studies Course in 1992, a Civil Affairs school in l993, and language courses in French and Spanish in 1993 and 1994.  On 25 March 1996, a request for transfer to the Civil Affairs Branch (Officer Specialty 38A) was approved, as an exception to policy.  This approval was based on his completion of the Civil Affairs Course, the Regional Studies Course, and qualifying assignments in Functional Area 39.  These qualifications served as the bases for the exception to the branch educational requirement to have completed the Civil Affairs Officer Advanced Course;  however, he was not given constructive service credit for the Civil Affairs Officer Advanced Course.  

On 1 April l996, the applicant was discharged from the Army and active duty with the rank of captain, by reason of failure to be selected for permanent promotion.  He was credited with 9 years, 1 month and 18 days active service.  He also had 5 years, 2 months and 14 days prior active service and 4 years, 8 months and 
7 days inactive service.  

On 18 September 1996, the applicant voluntarily enlisted in the USAR for 
3 years, with the rank of sergeant, pay grade E-5, for duty with a Troop Program Unit (TPU) at Fort Bragg.  His initial duty MOS was 91B20 (Medical Specialist) and he underwent Paramedic training at a local community college for 6 weeks in 1996.  His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows in Section II-Classification and Assignment Data, that MOS Code 91B20 was awarded as of the date of enlistment.  His enlistment contract also indicates that the entry MOS was 91B20.  

In connection with this enlistment, the US Army Recruiting Battalion Raleigh (North Carolina) issued a memorandum, SUBJECT:  Determination of Eligibility (Applicant’s Name and Social Security Number), dated 18 September 1996, in which an enlistment grade determination (waiver to enlist) of pay grade E-5, MOS immaterial was made.  The entire waiver packet is not available in the applicant’s records or with his application.  The regulatory guidance cited was Army Regulation 601-210, chapter 3, paragraph 3-18 and that footnotes 6, 8 and 10 applied, provided the applicant was otherwise qualified.  The approval went on to state:  “This Grade Determination is approved based on Leadership Skills based on Prior Service as a Commissioned Officer.”  The memorandum was signed by the battalion executive officer, a major.  

On 7 March 1999, the applicant extended his 3 year enlistment in the USAR for 
2 years, 6 months and 11 days.  His new expiration of term of service was established as 28 March 2002. His DA Form 2-1 shows that he was awarded MOS 38A20 as a Civil Affairs specialist on 14 March 1999.  The same form shows that on 29 March 1999 he was assigned to duties in MOS 38A40, as a Senior Training Writer/Developer, with the US Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center/School, Fort Bragg.  This is an AGR position.  
Army Regulation 601-210 provides the policies and guidance for enlistments into the Regular Army and the USAR.  Paragraph 3-18 pertains to “Enlistment pay grades for PS (prior service) personnel (for USAR enlistment).”  Paragraphs 
3a-3e and 3g and 3h, pertain to former enlisted personnel and their enlistment rank.  Even though the applicant had prior enlisted status, the fact that he had such a long break in service would have made him only eligible for enlistment in pay grade E-2 under this criteria. 

However, since the applicant also was discharged from a commissioned officer status, paragraph 3-18f applied.  That paragraph states, in essence that applicants for enlistment in the USAR who were last discharged from an officer status will have their grade determined in accordance with footnote 10 to chapter 3.  Footnote 10 states, in essence, that grade determinations for pay grade 
E-5 and lower and for assignment to a TPU rests with the executive officer of a recruiting battalion.  Higher grade determinations for assignment to a TPU rests with the area commanders of the US Army Recruiting Command.  Footnotes 
6 and 8 pertain to determination of dates of rank (date of enlistment is the date of rank in most cases) and in the case of former officers, basic eligibility for enlistment in the USAR.  Two of the basic requirements for enlistment/
assignment within the USAR are a unit vacancy and the pay grade of that position

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations it is concluded:

1.  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, in this case, has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2.  The applicant was discharged from an officer status on 1 April 1996.  He  enlisted in the USAR on 18 September 1996, for assignment to a TPU.  A grade determination of pay grade E-5, MOS immaterial was made by the executive officer of the servicing recruiting battalion.  The waiver/grade determination approval stated that the applicant’s former officer status and leadership skills were noted in making this determination.

3.  The Board also notes that the applicant voluntarily enlisted in the USAR, in pay grade E-5, for assignment to a TPU and duty in MOS 91B20.  The applicant was not trained in this MOS, and he had to undergo some training at a local community college to become MOS qualified.  Thus, while his military schooling and other skills qualified him for enlistment in the USAR and his enlistment, these qualifications would have been of little help in determining his eligibility for a duty position in a medical MOS.  
4.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board presumes regularity in Government operations to the extent that the applicant voluntarily enlisted for an assignment to a vacant duty position in the USAR.  Based on this vacancy, the Raleigh Recruiting Battalion executive officer appears to have made a grade determination based on the needs of the service.   

5.  It was not until March 1999 that the applicant was transferred to an AGR position for duty in MOS 38A20.  At the same time, he voluntarily extended his enlistment for more than 2 ½ years.  Again, this action would have had to have been voluntary. 

6.  Therefore, the Board must conclude that the applicant’s extensive background in Civil Affairs operations helped him to win a position in the AGR program.  Further, his qualifications appear to have qualified him for selection for promotion to pay grade E-6, with only a minimum time in the next lower rank.  

7.  The Board concludes that no evidence has been presented that the grade determination was in error and that the applicant should have been enlisted in the USAR in 1996 in a higher rank/pay grade.  

8.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__cla____  __wtm___  __tbr____  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000034925	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000907	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	112.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.