MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            30 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999031169

	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.

	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Chairperson	
	Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		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, correction of his military records to show his effective date of promotion as 8 December 1998 instead of 20 August 1999 and his date of rank (DOR) as 1 December 1998 instead of 20 August 1999.  He also
requests back pay and allowances from 1 December 1998 to 31 August 1999.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his DOR and effective date of promotion of 20 August 1999 is incorrect.  In support of his application he submits his promotion orders and a copy of DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report).

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

He enlisted 27 December 1990 as a medical specialist (91A) and continued to serve until he honorably discharged on 14 December 1995 in order to reenlist.  He reenlisted on 15 December 1995. 

The applicant provided a copy of Alpha Detachment, 516th Personnel Services Battalion Orders 211-502, dated 30 July 1999, which promoted the applicant to
the rank of SSG effective 8 December 1998 with a DOR of 1 December 1998.

The applicant provided a copy of his DA Form 1059, which shows that he 
attended the Basic Noncommissioned Officers’ Course (BNCOC), Class 4-99 from 13 July 1999 to 20 August 1999.

Army Regulation 600-8-19 governs the enlisted promotions and reductions 
function of the military personnel system.  It states, in pertinent part, that 
soldiers are required to be graduates of BNCOC prior to promotion to SSG.  Soldiers are allowed to compete for promotion to SSG but cannot be promoted to SSG until completion of BNCOC.  Soldiers who met a cutoff score for SSG, but
were not BNCOC graduates, would be promoted effective the date of graduation from BNCOC.  Approval of this exception gave them the effective date and date of rank of the graduation date of the first available class after they met the cutoff score, even if they did not attend that course, as long as attendance was precluded through no fault of their own and they eventually graduated from the next available class they were able to attend.

In the processing of this case an advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) was provided by the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) Promotions Branch.  

The applicant was provided 30 days to submit matters in rebuttal; however, the applicant had not responded in over 90 days.

The PERSCOM advisory opinion stated that the applicant’s name appeared on the Monthly Promotion Selection Name List for 1 March 1998.  However, the applicant had not completed Non-Commissioned Officers Education System
(NCOES) BNCOC.  Army Policy states that soldiers who appear on a Monthly Promotion Selection Name List, but have not graduated from NCOES, will be promoted the date they successfully complete NCOES.  Date of rank and effective date will be the date of NCOES graduation.  PERSCOM also stated that the applicant submitted a request for NCOES waiver; however, his waiver was disapproved due to lack of military occupational specialty (MOS) 91B qualification and preparation of a train-up packet.  PERSCOM further stated that the applicant attended BNCOC class 4-99 and graduated on 20 August 1999.  

Therefore, based on the applicant’s selection on the 1 March 1998 Monthly Promotion Selection Name List and BNCOC graduation, his correct date of rank and effective date of promotion to SSG is 20 August 1999.  The applicant included as part of his request a copy of promotion order 211-502, dated 30 July 1999, executing promotion to SSG, with a date of rank of 1 December 1998 and effective date of 8 December 1998.  This order is erroneous and the servicing Personnel Service Branch (PSB) was notified in writing to revoke the order immediately and issue a new order with the correct date of rank and effective date of 20 August 1999.  The Total Army Personnel Data Base has been updated to reflect the applicant’s correct date of rank and effective date of 20 August 199 for promotion to SSG.  In conclusion, the advisory opinion stated that the applicant’s request should be denied.

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(s), it is concluded:

1.  Based upon evidence of record the applicant’s effective DOR and date of promotion to SSG is 20 August 1999.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his military records to show his effective date of promotion as 8 December 1998, his DOR as 1 December 1998, and is not entitled to back pay and allowances from 1 December 1998 to 31 August 1999.

2.  The foregoing is supported by an advisory opinion from the Promotions Branch of PERSCOM.

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 the aforementioned requirement.

4.  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:

BJE____  HOF_____  EWL____  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999031169	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000330	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	-ACTIVE DUTY	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1  21		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.