MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           28 January 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002073223

	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. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Ms. Tracey L. Pinson 		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:  That his reduction from pay grade E-7 to E-6 be revoked and that he be scheduled for the next available Advanced Noncommissioned Officers Course (ANCOC).

APPLICANT STATES:  He was originally scheduled to attend ANCOC on 9 January 2000.  However, he was never notified that he was scheduled to attend that class and never received the necessary orders.  The training records show that the class had been cancelled.  On or about 27 June 2000, he was informed that he had been scheduled for ANCOC during the same time his Army Reserve unit was scheduled to perform its annual training.  He informed his career manager of that conflict and that he would have to inform his commander that he wouldn’t be going to annual training with the unit.  The applicant’s commander consented to him attending ANCOC instead of annual training.  However, when the applicant called his career manager with that news, he was informed that his training seat had been given to someone else because they didn’t expect the applicant’s commander to allow him to miss their annual training.

In support of his application he submits a copy of his unit’s annual training orders, a copy of the orders reducing him from pay grade E-7 to E-6 dated 24 January 2002, and a copy of the e-mail correspondence between him and the Active Guard and Reserve (AGR) Reduction Panel.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were not provided to the Board.  The following information was derived from documents submitted by the applicant, himself.

On 24 January 2002, the applicant, a sergeant first class serving on active duty in the AGR program, was reduced to the rank of staff sergeant.

In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the Army Reserve Personnel Command (AR-PERSCOM).  The AR-PERSCOM states that the applicant was scheduled twice for ANCOC, and both classes were cancelled for reasons which aren’t recorded.  The AR-PERSCOM states that the applicant’s promotion orders have the entry that the promotion was contingent upon his successful completion of ANCOC.  That entry is made in accordance with applicable Army Regulations.  Since the applicant was well aware that he had to complete ANCOC to retain his promotion and there is no indication that he made any attempt to contact his career manager to secure an ANCOC seat, the AR-PERSCOM recommends disapproval of the applicant’s request.  The 
AR-PERSCOM adds that the applicant has again been promoted to pay grade 

E-7 on orders which predicate his promotion on his completion of ANCOC.  The applicant was provided a copy of this advisory opinion and given the opportunity to respond.  The applicant did not submit any additional documentation in the time he was given to do so.

The Board found it necessary to contact the AR-PERSCOM to clarify the processes for ANCOC scheduling when soldiers are conditionally promoted.  The AR-PERSCOM stated that a soldier is given one year to schedule ANCOC, and a second year to complete ANCOC.  The AR-PERSCOM stated that they would not cancel a training seat unless they received something in writing informing them that a soldier could not attend a class.  A soldier telephonically indicating that he had to clear his attendance with his commander would not be cause to cancel a training seat.  When asked why a soldier is not rescheduled for ANCOC when a seat is cancelled, the AR-PERSCOM stated that it depended on the reason given for the cancellation.  If a soldier has a medical problem or other problem preventing his or her attendance with doesn't have a fixed termination date, they will not automatically reschedule him or her.  The onus is then shifted to the soldier.  In cases where a conflict has a definitive expiration date, they will reschedule the soldier when the cancellation is made.  The applicant was furnished a copy of a record of this phone conversation and was provided an opportunity to respond.  He did not respond.

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

1.  While the applicant has stated that two training seats that were reserved for him by the AR-PERSCOM were cancelled, he has not provided any documentation to substantiate his claim that his training seat was cancelled when he had to ask his commander if he could attend during the unit's annual training.  

2.  The AR-PERSCOM has stated that they would not have cancelled a training seat based on a phone call, especially when a soldier was only delaying confirmation of his attendance to clear it with his commander.

3.  In addition, the applicant has not shown that he, himself, attempted to secure a training seat.  A senior noncommissioned officer would be expected to take the initiative to insure that he was scheduled for ANCOC, a condition for promotion, within the timeframe required to retain the promotion.

4.  Without clear evidence that the applicant's training seat was cancelled based upon his call to AR-PERSCOM, and clear evidence that he unsuccessfully attempted to secure a training seat for ANCOC, there is insufficient evidence in which to void the revocation of the applicant’s promotion order.

5.  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

___kak __  ___mhm_  ____tlp__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002073223	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030128	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	129.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.