APPLICANT REQUESTS: That he be advanced on the retired list to his USAR grade of lieutenant colonel (LTC).
APPLICANT STATES: That he retired from active service in the grade of chief warrant officer (CW4) on 1 March 1973 and should be advanced to his USAR grade on the retired list.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He entered active duty on 22 October 1942 and was discharged on 26 October 1950 in the grade of sergeant first class. He was commissioned a second lieutenant USAR and remained on active duty as a commissioned officer until 25 August 1956 when he was separated in the grade of captain. He served in the USAR until his return to active duty on 27 June 1958 as a warrant officer. Thereafter, he remained on continuous active duty until his retirement effective 1 March 1973 in the grade of CW4 after more than 30 years of service. At the time of his retirement he also held the USAR grade of LTC.
Army Regulation 635-100, Officer Personnel, pertaining to the separation and retirement of officers, provides in pertinent part, for the advancement of warrant officers to higher grades when his or her active service (plus service on the retired list) totals 30 years. Any retired warrant officer of the Army is entitled to be advanced on the retired list to the highest commissioned grade he or she served satisfactorily on active duty as determined by the Secretary of the Army.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. Although the applicant held the grade of LTC in the USAR at the time he retired, the evidence of record does not show that he served on active duty as a LTC, which is a perquisite for his advancement to that grade on the retired list.
2. 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
3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicants 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
DENY APPLICATION
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018687
The applicant truly believes that, after his acceptance of appointment to the rank/pay grade of chief warrant officer two (CW2)/W-2 and the pattern of his speedy advancement to the rank/pay grade of CW4/W-4, had he been retained on active duty as an RA officer in the rank/pay grade of MAJ/O-4, he would have advanced to at least the rank/pay grade of LTC/O-5 in a relatively short time and been able to retire in that grade. The applicant's requests for correction of his record to show that he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002856
The applicant requests that his military records be corrected to reflect the highest grade he held. It states, in pertinent part, that a commissioned officer who retires under any provision of law shall be retired in the highest grade in which they served on active duty satisfactorily, as determined by the Secretary of the military department concerned, for not less than six months. The highest grade the applicant held on active duty was CPT and he was computed for retired pay at that grade.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021222
Having had prior enlisted, warrant officer, and commissioned service in the Regular Army, USAR, and the ARNG, the applicant's records show he was promoted to the rank of MAJ in the USAR on 15 August 1981. The advisory official recommended disapproval of the applicant's request to have his records corrected to show he was promoted to LTC. The evidence of record confirms that on 15 August 1988 when the LTC Promotion Selection Board convened the applicant was serving as a CW2 in the VAARNG.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050011178C070206
The applicant states, in effect, that he served from November 1967 to March 1974 as a Reserve officer on active duty (AD). While serving on AD, in the rank of SGM/E-9, the applicant was promoted as a Reserve commissioned officer to lieutenant colonel effective 11 December 1986, without being called to AD in that rank. The Board also finds no evidence that the applicant served 6 consecutive months on active duty as a LTC/O-5 or to show that he served satisfactorily in the grade of LTC in an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013559
The applicant contends if he had been promoted to LTC with a date of rank of 24 June 1983, it would have given him the time in grade and the active duty service requirement to retire in the grade of LTC. The opinion continues that the applicant's promotion eligibility date to LTC was 23 September 1989, however, he was appointed a warrant officer on 24 June 1988 and was not eligible for promotion consideration to LTC. Additionally, the applicant contends that his records should show he was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077360C070215
The Board in its original consideration of this case found that the applicant was not eligible for advancement to LTC/0-5 on the Retired List because he never satisfactorily served on active duty in that rank and pay grade. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant did not complete 10 years of active duty service as a commissioned officer, as is required by law, in order to be retired in a commissioned officer status. However, the evidence of record also confirms that the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059673C070421
Rank placement on the Retired List is based solely on the highest rank in which a member satisfactorily served on active duty, USAR service in an inactive status while a member of a dual component program does not satisfy this active duty satisfactory service provision of the law. The evidence of record reveals that the applicant was advanced to the rank and grade of CPT/0-3 on the Retired List by the AGDRB based on this being the highest commissioned officer rank and pay grade he held and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016602
There were no provisions allowing for the continuation of members in a dual component status subsequent to their length of service retirement from active duty. It states that warrant officer and enlisted members of the Army are entitled, when their active service plus their service on the Retired List totals 30 years, to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade in which they served on active duty satisfactorily. Given the applicant never served on active duty in a commissioned...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008580
Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). The applicant requests, in effect, correction of her military records to show at the time of retirement her rank/grade was colonel (COL)/O-6 vice lieutenant colonel (LTC)/O5. Since she did not serve in the grade of COL for 3 years in an active status, she is not entitled to the benefits associated with that promotion.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058032C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. A Department of the Army (DA) Form 3713 (Data for Retired Pay), dated 25 April 1994, confirms the applicant as a result of his having satisfactorily served in the highest grade to which he was promoted, paid, and served in on active duty as a commissioned officer, was placed on the Retired List in the rank and pay grade of CPT/0-3, effective 10 February 1994. The record...