2. The applicant requests that he be advanced to pay grade E-2 effective 26 May 1992 and that he receive all back-pay and allowances due him.
3. He states that on 26 May 1992 he received his Eagle Scout designation which should have resulted in his advancement to pay grade E-2, but his unit never completed the necessary paperwork for the advancement.
4. The applicant has included a copy of the documentation granting him an Eagle Scout designation (Eagle Scout Certificate 58-708) which is dated 26 May 1992.
5. Army Regulation 601-210, Regular and Army Reserve Enlistment Program, in effect at the time, provides in Table 2-3, Rule L, that an applicant who is or has been a member of the Boy Scouts of America and is a recipient of Boy Scout Eagle Certificate Form 58-708 will be enlisted in pay grade E-2.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant has provided the proper documentation to support that he should have been enlisted in pay grade E-2 on 26 May 1992. Accordingly, his DOR should be adjusted and he should receive all back pay and allowances effective as of that date.
2. In view of the foregoing, the applicants records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was enlisted in pay grade E-2 on 26 May 1992 and by authorizing him any and all back pay and allowances due him as a result there from.
BOARD VOTE:
GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
CHAIRPERSON
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9609292C070209
He was advanced to pay grade E-2 effective 9 January 1992 with a date of rank of 29 October 1991, under the provisions of Army Regulation 601-210, table 2-3, rule L. 7. Rule L of table 2-3 states that if an applicant is or has been a member of the Boy Scouts of America and is a recipient of Boy Scout Eagle Certificate Form 58-708 he will be enlisted in pay grade E-2. That rule goes on to say that the soldier will be advised to submit a request to the Army Board for Correction of Military...
CG | BCMR | Advancement and Promotion | 2002-135
This final decision, dated May 22, 2003, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that his pay grade from the date of his enlistment, May 19, 1997, to November 18, 1997, was E-3 instead of E-2, and that his pay grade from March 12, 1998, to May 18, 1998, was E-4 instead of E- 3. of the current Recruiting Manual, which states that “Applicants who are Eagle Scouts may be enlisted in pay grade...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02428
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02428 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted to the grade of Airman First Class (A1C/E-3). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05318
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05318 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His grade at the time of entry on active duty should have been advanced based on his status as an Eagle Scout. ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was never told that since he...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600264
I am requesting Board action to upgrade my discharge to Honorable for 3 reasons: 1. Member was referred as the result of self referral for drug abuse with a negative urinalysis on 7 September 1993.931015: Command DAPA recommended to Legal Officer that Applicant be administratively separated due to admitting to drug abuse with a negative urinalysis.931030*: Applicant from confinement (24 days). Accordingly, it is strongly recommended that ATAR F_(Applicant) be administratively discharge...
NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00463
ND00-00463 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000229, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 870701: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by 870430 nonjudicial punishment for wrongful use of a controlled substance and having been involved in a positive command directed urine sample on...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011162
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 September 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080011162 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicants service records show that he was placed in military confinement from 30 March through 15 April 1962. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to a general discharge or an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000911
On 1 June 1972, a mental status evaluation found the applicant's behavior normal. On 30 June 1972, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 with an undesirable discharge for unfitness by shirking. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600570
The In the absence of a complete administrative discharge package in the service record, the NDRB vote was based on presumption of regularity in this case. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. ” The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to: Secretary of the Navy...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015308
The applicant requests correction of his records to show he was transferred to the Retired Reserve at age 60 in the rank/grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 instead of private (PV2)/E-2. Commanders may consider any misconduct, to include a record of unexcused absences or unsatisfactory participation, as evidence of inefficiency. The evidence of records shows the applicant held the rank/grade of SSG/E-6 from 1981 through 1989.