Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9706027C070209
Original file (9706027C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


	IN THE CASE OF:   
	


	BOARD DATE:           14 April 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC97-06027
				   AR1999018961

	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.




	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 retirement grade be changed from chief warrant officer 2 (W-2) to his highest commissioned officer grade held  on active duty, captain (O-3).

APPLICANT STATES:  When he went through retirement outprocessing at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, he asked when his retirement grade would be upgraded to captain and was told at the 30 year point.  When he reached the 30 year mark,  he called the Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN) to find out why they had not advanced him on the retired list.  The verbal and later written response was that he originally should have retired as a captain, based on his 14-plus years active commissioned service.  He encloses a copy of the letter from ARPERCEN concerning his retirement grade.

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

He was commissioned a Regular Army second lieutenant, Artillery, on 5 June 1965.  He attained the rank of captain on 9 June 1972.

On 27 November 1979 the applicant was discharged for failure to be selected for permanent promotion.  He was simultaneously appointed and called to active duty as a Reserve warrant officer.  He had 14 years, 5 months and 23 days of active commissioned service.

The applicant voluntarily retired from active duty on 1 August 1985 at Fort Bragg as a chief warrant officer 2.  He had a total of 20 years, 1 month and 26 days of active creditable service.

Army Regulation 635-100, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for separation of officer personnel.  Chapter 4 of that regulation establishes procedures for the implementation of laws and policies governing the nondisability retirement of officers, specifically Title 10 of the United States Code. It provides, in pertinent part, that unless entitled to a higher retired grade under some other provision of law, a warrant officer retires in the grade held on the day before the date of retirement, or in any higher warrant officer grade served on active duty satisfactorily for at least 31 days.  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.




A 30 December 1996 ARPERCEN letter informs the applicant that he should have retired as a captain.  In the processing of this case, a staff member of the Board contacted the Army Reserve Personnel Command and was informed by an official of the Retired Pay Division that the letter is incorrect and the applicant should have been advanced on the retired list as he initially requested.  The staff member was also informed that the person who signed the letter no longer works there.

On 4 February 1999 the Army Grade Determination Review Board determined the highest grade in which the applicant served satisfactorily for the purpose of computation of retired pay was captain (O-3).

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.  The applicantÂ’s retirement in pay grade W-2 was appropriate in accordance with applicable law and regulations, since that was the grade he held on the day before his date of retirement.

2.  The applicant should have been advanced to the rank of captain when his active service and service on the retired list totaled 30 years.  The letter from ARPERCEN advising him that he should have retired as a captain does not conform with the law and governing regulations, and is incorrect.

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

(Note:  The Support Division, Army Review Boards Agency, St Louis, is directed to coordinate with AR-PERSCOM, Retired Pay Division, to advance the applicant on the retired list to the rank of captain effective 5 June 1995.)

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




						Loren G. Harrell
						Director


INDEX

CASE ID
AC97-06027/AR1999018961
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
19990414
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
129.04
2.
136.00
3.

4.

5.

6.



Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9706027

    Original file (9706027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. When his or her active...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100381C070208

    Original file (2004100381C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's rebuttal to the opinion again offered that the policy was unfair to former senior enlisted personnel who accepted selection for the PA program because former warrant officers are allowed to retire in the highest grade held. When his or her service (plus service on the retired list) totals 30 years, they may be advanced on the retired list to the highest commissioned grade in which he or she served satisfactorily on active duty. The applicant, with over 14 years of enlisted...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120000989

    Original file (20120000989.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Title 10, U.S. Code, section 3964 provides that retired personnel may be advanced in grade to the highest grade satisfactorily held while on active duty, as determined by the Secretary of the Army, upon completion of 30 years of service. Orders D111-13, dated 9 June 1989, show he retired from active duty on 31 August 1989 and was placed on the Retired List in the rank of SGM. The evidence of record shows he was advanced on the retired list from SGM to CPT, effective 8 May 1995.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019138

    Original file (20080019138.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his records to show that he retired from the Army in the rank of captain with a date of rank retroactive to 20 November 1957 and that his retired pay be adjusted accordingly. While the evidence of record confirms that the applicant was promoted in the USAR to the rank of captain, there is insufficient evidence that shows he met the criteria for retirement in the rank of captain. However, while the available records show that he was promoted to the rank...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073811C070403

    Original file (2002073811C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Section 634 of the TCA provided a saving provision to enable dual status active duty Army Reserve officers who retire after the effective date of DOPMA to keep their Reserve grade held on 14 September 1981, the day prior to DOPMA becoming effective. Section 634 implicitly states that "a Reserve officer on active duty (as an officer or enlisted member) on 14 September 1981...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014743

    Original file (20090014743.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Their retired pay is computed as 2 1/2 times the number of years of service, minus 1 percent for each year under 30 years of service, times the average of the highest 36 months of base pay during that service. The applicable laws and regulations provide that officers who voluntarily retire with at least 20 but less than 30 years of service and do not have 10 years of service as a commissioned officer will retire in their enlisted grade and have their retired pay calculated at their enlisted...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010275

    Original file (20090010275.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 29 August 2008, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) informed the applicant that he was not eligible for advancement on the Retired List to a commissioned rank since he did not serve on active duty or full-time National Guard duty for a period of more than 6 months. The intent of Title l0, U.S. Code, section 3964, is that each enlisted retired member of the Army who is retired with less than 30 years of active service is...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058600C070421

    Original file (2001058600C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058032C070420

    Original file (2001058032C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001053334C070420

    Original file (2001053334C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Having served 10 months and 13 days, the applicant was discharged for the purpose of accepting a commission in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 9 July 1970. On 20 February 2001, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) denied the applicant advancement to CPT on the retired list because he did not serve as a captain while on active duty. Title 10, United States Code, section 3964, provides, in pertinent part, that enlisted personnel who retired with less than 30 years of...