RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 April 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070013399 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. Director Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Chairperson Member Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, a grade determination for Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 13F3O (Fire Support Specialist). 2. The applicant states, in effect, that MOS 13F3O is severely understrength so he should have been able to retain his previously held grade of Staff Sergeant (SSG) pay grade E-6. 3. The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), his Army National Guard (ARNG) discharge orders, and his DD Form 4/1 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant enlisted in the ARNG on 14 June 1995, for a period of 8 years. He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 91B (Medical Specialist). The highest rank he attained while serving in the ARNG was SSG, pay grade E-6. 2. The applicant's available records show that he was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Enduring Freedom on 15 August 2004. He was released from active duty on 4 January 2006 in MOS 91W30 and was transferred to an ARNG unit. He was issued a DD Form 214 that shows the effective date of his pay grade to E-6 was 5 May 2003. 3. The applicant's military service records contain a NGB Form 22 that shows he was honorably released from the ARNG on 20 June 2006 for the purpose of enlisting into another component of the U.S. Armed Forces. 4. On 5 June 2006, the applicant signed a DA Form 3286 (Statement of Understanding) acknowledging that he was enlisting into the United States Army Training Enlistment Program and for skill level 1, MOS 13F (Fire Support Specialist). 5. On 20 June 2006 the applicant authenticated the DD Form 1966, pages 1-6 (Record of Military Processing – Armed Forces of the United States) that show he was accessed in the RA in the grade of E-5 in MOS 13F (Fire Support Specialist). 6. In an advisory opinion from the Chief, Force Alignment Division, Human Resources Command (HRC), Alexandria, Virginia, she stated that after a thorough review of the applicant's enlistment contract, dated 21 June 2006, the applicant request for reinstatement of rank was disapproved. At the time of his enlistment, the applicant’s MOS 91W was at 104% for Staff Sergeant (SSG). Per established policy, in order for the applicant to enlist he would have to accept a reduction in rank and retrain into a priority MOS. The advisory opinion finally stated that USAREC (United States Army Recruitment Command) reviewed the applicant’s enlistment contract and found that HRC’s decision was without error in accordance with established policy. 7. The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for acknowledgement and/or possible rebuttal on 21 December 2006. He did not respond. 8. Army Regulation 601-210, prescribes the policy and procedures for the enlistment of personnel in the RA and USAR. Chapter 2, paragraph 3-17, of this regulation specifies that an applicant in the grade of E5 and above must submit a formal request to determine assignment availability and vacancy must exist in the applicant’s former MOS. 9. Army Regulation 601-210, Chapter 9, paragraph 9-7, of this regulation specifies that an applicant who is enlisting for 9A (U.S. Training Enlistment Program) and is prior service must be willing to retrain in order to enlist under this program and will be guaranteed a specific MOS. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that he should be restored to an E-6 due to personnel shortages in his current MOS 13F. However, insufficient evidence has been found to support this contention. 2. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was promoted to the grade of SSG/E-6 in his previous MOS 91W while in the ARNG. The evidence of record shows that the applicant’s previous MOS 91W30 was overstrength when he enlisted into the RA. The evidence of record further shows that the applicant enlisted in the U.S. Training Enlistment Program for MOS 13F and agreed to accept a reduction in rank and to retrain into priority MOS 13F. Therefore, he is not entitled to a correction of his records to restore his grade to SSG/ E-6. 3. 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 has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement. 4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING RML____ GJP____ SWF_ ___ DENY APPLICATION OARD 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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned. __R M L_____ CHAIRPERSON ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20070013399 2 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 1901 SOUTH BELL STREET, 2ND FLOOR ARLINGTON, VA 22202-4508