PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           9 February 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999032197

	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.  

	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs		Member	
	Ms. Carol Jo Suiter		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 his records be corrected to show he enlisted in the rank and grade of Private First Class (PFC), E-3 with the appropriate adjustment in his pay.

3.  The applicant states he enlisted under the impression that, because he had prior service and college experience, he would be given the rank of PFC or maybe even Specialist, E-4.  Supporting evidence is as listed on the DD Form 149.

4.  The applicant’s available military records show that he had 1 month and 18 days of active duty in the U. S. Navy when he was discharged for medical reasons in 1996.  In 1997, he attended some college courses at the Westwood College of Technology.  He enlisted in the Regular Army, with a waiver, on        19 November 1998 in the rank of Private, E-1.  He was advanced to Private (PV2), E-2 on 19 June 1999 without a waiver and to PFC on 1 November 1999 without a waiver.

5.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Retention Management Division, U. S. Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM).  PERSCOM opined that the applicant’s date of rank should have been adjusted to 1 October 1998 to credit him with his 1 month and 18 days of prior active service.  However, the college he attended was not listed in the Accredited Institutions of Post Secondary Education and therefore could not be used for an accelerated rank into the U. S. Army.  PERSCOM recommended no change to his rank.

6.  A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment or rebuttal.  He did not respond within the given time frame.  

7.  Army Regulation 601-210 provides that individuals who had successfully completed 30 or more classroom semester or 45 or more quarter hours would be enlisted in pay grade E-2; 60 or more classroom semester or 90 or more quarter hours in pay grade E-3; or completed a degree-producing college program of 4 years duration in pay grade E-4.  The college or university had to be listed in the Accredited Institutions of Post Secondary Education book published by the American Counsel on Education.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 prescribes the enlisted promotion and reduction function of the military personnel system.  It states that the advancement eligibility criteria to PV2 is 6 months time-in-service (TIS) waiverable to 4 months TIS.  The advancement eligibility criteria to PFC is 12 months TIS (6 months waiverable) and 4 months time-in-grade (2 months waiverable).

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board concludes that the applicant is entitled to have his Private, E-1 date of rank adjusted to 1 October 1998 due to his prior active service.  

2.  Because the applicant has provided no evidence to show that Westwood College of Technology is an accredited college, he is not entitled to have his records corrected to show he enlisted in a higher grade than E-1.

3.  However, because the applicant is entitled to have his date of rank to PV1 adjusted, the Board concludes that his dates of rank to PV2 and PFC should also be adjusted.  The evidence of record shows he was advanced to PV2 and PFC at approximately the minimum amount of time in service required without a waiver and so his dates of rank to PV2 and PFC should be adjusted to 1 April 1999 and 1 October 1999, respectively.  He should be entitled to all pay and allowances due as a result of these corrections.

4.  In view of the foregoing, it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by:

     a.  showing the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 November 1998 in the rank of PV1, E-1 and a date of rank of 1 October 1998;

     b.  showing that the applicant was advanced to PV2, E-2 with a date of rank and effective date of 1 April 1999 and to PFC, E-3 with a date of rank and effective date of 1 October 1999; and

     c.  paying to the applicant all pay and allowances due as a result of the aforementioned corrections.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__rvo___  __dsj___  __cjs___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999032197	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000209	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	112.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.