MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           28  January 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002076557

	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 records be corrected to show that he enlisted as prior service in the Regular Army in pay grade E-5.

APPLICANT STATES:  He was enlisted in pay grade E-4 instead of his previously held grade of E-5 because his Primary Leadership and Development Course (PLDC) equivalency wasn’t accepted.  Subsequent to his enlistment, his PLDC equivalency was approved.

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

He enlisted in the Army Reserve (USAR) on 5 October 1989, was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) of motor transport operator, and was promoted to pay grade E-5 on 1 October 1997.

On 18 June 2001, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army in pay grade E-4 for 3 years.

On 4 March 2002, the applicant was awarded PLDC equivalency.

On the date the applicant submitted his request, he was serving on active duty in pay grade E-4.

In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM).  The PERSCOM stated that the enlistment regulation states that a current member of the reserve component may be enlisted in their current pay grade if a vacancy exists.  At the time of the applicant’s enlistment, there were no vacancies in his MOS in pay grade E-5.  In fact, pay grade E-5 for his MOS was at 105% at that time.  As such, the applicant was enlisted in the proper pay grade.  The PERSCOM recommends that no change be made to the applicant's records.  The applicant was provided a copy of this advisory opinion and given the opportunity to respond.  The applicant 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.  The applicant's contention that his inability to be granted a PLDC waiver prior to his enlistment in the Regular Army had a bearing on the grade he enlisted has not been established with either the documentation submitted by the applicant or the evidence of record.

2.  However, as pointed out by the PERSCOM, the applicant could not have been enlisted in pay grade E-5 since there were no vacancies in that grade for the applicant’s MOS at that time.
3.  The applicant was well aware of the grade in which he was enlisting and accepted that grade.  While it is unfortunate that he lost a grade in the process, at the time the Army needed soldiers in the applicant’s MOS in pay grade E-4 and not pay grade E-5.

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:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____kak _  ___mhm_  ___tlp___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002076557	
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.	112.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.