MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      .

	BOARD DATE:           8 May 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002080395

	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. W. W. Osborn, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Member	
	Mr. Robert L. Duecaster		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, that his record be corrected to show that he enlisted in pay grade E-5.

APPLICANT STATES:  He was told by his recruiter that his pay grade would be changed to E-5.  He submits a transcript of his Marine Corps, (USMC) training courses to demonstrate that he is qualified for pay grade E-5.

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

Following 7 Years 11 months and 21 days he was separated with an honorable characterization of service and transferred to the USMC Reserve.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) lists his military education as Recruit training (13 weeks), Marine Combat Training (4 weeks), Assault Amphibian Crewman (8 weeks), Corporal Course (2 weeks) and Marksmanship instructor Course (2 weeks).

The Army Recruiting Battalion, Dallas Texas submitted a grade determination waiver to enlist the applicant in pay grade E-4 and that a waiver request was approved on 7 March 2002.  On 11 April 2002 the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army in pay grade E-4.  The applicant is currently serving on active duty in pay grade E-4.  

During the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM).  The Chief, Retention Management Branch noted that the Army had specific NCOES (Noncommissioned Officer Educational System) education requirements for promotion to pay grade E-5 and above.  It noted the acceptable substitutes for the Army's requirement consisted only of the USMC NCO Course, USMC Leadership Course, USMC NCO Leadership Course, USMC NCO Basic Course, USMC Staff NCO Advance Course and the USMC Staff NCO Career Course.  He noted that the courses taught through the USMC Institute in Washington DC were not the equivalent of PLDC.  Since the applicant lacked PLDC (Primary Leadership Development Course, he could not have been considered for enlistment as a sergeant (E-5).  Denial of his request was recommended.

The advisory opinion was furnished to the applicant for rebuttal.  He did not respond.  

The Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) internet homepage for PLDC notes that the course is 4 weeks and 2 days in length.

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.  There is no available evidence that any recruiter advised applicant that he could enlist in pay grade E-5 or that his rank/pay grade would be changed after he enlisted.  

2.  He provided no details as to why he voluntarily enlisted in pay grade E-4 if he could have enlisted in or for a promise of a higher grade.  

3.  The applicant's military education did not qualify him for enlistment in pay grade E-5.

4.  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.

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

__SAC __  ___MDM_  __RLD__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002080395	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	20030508 	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.