PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           26 SEPTEMBER 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002071359

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Member	
	Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher		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  The applicant requests that the order revoking her promotion to Sergeant E-5 be rescinded.  She is supported in her request by her company commander and by her hospital commander. 

3.  The applicant states that she was promoted to Sergeant in accordance with the provisions in the civilian acquired skills program (ACASP).  She states that the original order conditionally promoting her to Sergeant required her to attend the primary leadership development course (PLDC); however, soldiers promoted in accordance with the provisions of the ACASP are exempt from the PLDC completion requirements. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that she was a licensed practical nurse in the state of Florida.  She enlisted in the Army for four years in pay grade E-4 on 15 May 2000.  Her Statement of Enlistment – United States Army/Army Reserve Civilian Acquired Skills Enlistment Program (DA Form 3286-68) indicates that she understood that her civilian acquired skill as a licensed practical nurse (MOS (Military Occupational Specialty) 91C – Practical Nurse), was being recognized for enlistment.  She stated that she understood that enlistment under that program authorized her to be advanced in grade based upon her demonstrated skill, proficiency, and conduct as a soldier.  She indicated that she would be advanced to pay grade E-5 in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210, provided she received a recommendation from her commander.  She stated that she understood that promotion was not automatic but depended upon her demonstration of proficiency, skill, and conduct.  

5.  A certificate of training given at Womack Army Medical Center, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, shows that during the period 3 November to 29 December 2000, the applicant successfully met the requirements for completion of the 8 week ACASP.   

6.  A DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 14 December 2001 [that date should have shown 14 December 2000] shows that her commander recommended that the applicant be promoted to Sergeant E-5 in accordance with the provisions of the ACASP with an effective date of promotion on              1 January 2001.  He stated that she met all the requirements for the accelerated promotion.

7.  On 16 May 2001 that same commander recommended that she be promoted to Sergeant.  He stated that she could not attend PLDC at that time because she was pregnant. 

8.  On 17 January 2002 the applicant was conditionally promoted to Sergeant effective 1 January 2001.  The order effecting her promotion stated that if she did not attend and successfully complete PLDC as scheduled, not to exceed            12 months from the effective date of the order, she would be administratively reduced.

9.  On 8 February 2002 the 18th Personnel Service Battalion at Fort Bragg revoked her promotion order, citing Army Regulation 600-8-19, special offline and late promotion actions information paper, as the authority for revoking her promotion.  

10.  Army Regulation 601-210, chapter 7, provides policy and guidance for the implementation of the ACASP.  The ACASP attracts and uses persons with civilian acquired skills required by the Army.  Persons qualified for the ACASP may be given an advance in grade upon enlistment and may be entitled to accelerated promotion based on the skill level held and demonstrated duty performance.  Promotion to the accelerated grade and award of the MOS authorized by the enlistment agreement will be made either with the approval of the unit commander or by the training commander for active Army personnel, after successful completion of all training required by the enlistment program selected.  Table 7-1 lists the skills and criteria authorized for the ACASP, and states that to qualify for MOS 91C20 as a practical nurse with later appointment to pay grade E-5 a soldier must have successfully completed a State-approved course in practical, registered, or vocational nursing; must have successfully passed the National Council of State Boards of Nursing Licensure Examination and possess current state license as a practical or vocational nurse; and must have completed a specified period of proficiency training as a prerequisite for award of the MOS, and be able to perform the duty requirements of the MOS before award of the MOS and promotion to an accelerated pay grade.  Soldiers authorized to be promoted to E-5 under the ACASP, table 7-1, are exempt from the PLDC completion requirement.  However, soldiers must be scheduled and complete PLDC as soon as possible.  While promotion may be made, this does not exempt soldier from attending PLDC for all other purposes.  

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 provides for enlisted promotions and states in pertinent part that soldiers enlisted into the Army under ACASP in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210 will be promoted under this paragraph [AR 600-8-19, paragraph 3-7].  The effective date and date of rank will be the date all requirements are met.  That paragraph also states that all soldiers promoted under the ACASP will be reported to PERSCOM for grade change input.

12.  The Special/Offline and Late Promotion Actions information paper cited by the 18th Personnel Services Battalion in revoking her promotion order, is a Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) paper posted on 16 October 2001, which states in pertinent part, that all requests to adjust the BESD (basic entry service date) of soldiers promoted under the ACASP must be received by PERSCOM not later than six months from recommended date of rank.  Soldiers may submit DD Form 149 to the ABCMR for requests older than six months.

13.  In an undated advisory opinion, the Chief, Promotions Branch at the Total Army Personnel Command stated that the applicant’s packet did not contain the promotion authority’s approval of the promotion as required by Army Regulation 601-210, and that promotion requests submitted 6 months after the date the soldier completes the required training must be forwarded to the ACASP proponent for determination.

14.  In a 17 June 2002 advisory opinion, the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff   G-1 recommended that the applicant be retroactively promoted to the rank of sergeant with a date or rank of 29 December 2000 [the date she completed the proficiency training] and that she receive all due pay and allowances from that date.  A copy of this opinion was furnished the applicant.  She concurred on      21 June 2002.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s commanding officer recommended that the applicant be promoted to Sergeant effective on 1 January 2001.  In so doing, he indicated that she met all the requirements for the accelerated promotion.  She was promoted to Sergeant effective on that date.         

2.  The revocation of the applicant’s promotion was erroneous.  Apparently, the fact that she was promoted to Sergeant was not reported to PERSCOM within six months as required by that command.  The Board notes that the order effecting her promotion was published more than one year after the effective date of her promotion.  Nevertheless, her promotion to Sergeant, pay grade E-5 effective on 1 January 2001 was and is correct.  The applicant was qualified for the accelerated promotion and was recommended for promotion by her unit commander.  Notwithstanding the advisory opinion from the Deputy Chief of Staff G-1 the effective date of her promotion should be 1 January 2001, the date  recommended by her commander.  Consequently, her records should be corrected to show that she was promoted to Sergeant, pay grade E-5 effective and with a date of rank of 1 January 2001, as she has requested and as recommended by her commander. She should receive all due pay and allowances in pay grade E-5 effective on 1 January 2001. 

3.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was promoted to Sergeant, pay grade E-5 effective and with a date of rank of 1 January 2001, and that she receive all due pay and allowances in that grade effective on 1 January 2001. 

BOARD VOTE:  

__RVO__  __RJW__  __KYF  __  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002071359	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020926	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.