Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058576C070421
Original file (2001058576C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 24 January 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001058576


         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Mr. William Blakely Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. George D. Paxson Chairperson
Mr. Walter T. Morrison Member
Mr. Richard T. Dunbar Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS :

1. The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.


2. The applicant requests, in effect, that his retired rank and pay grade be changed to major (MAJ/04).

3. The applicant states, in effect, that he served on active duty in a commissioned status for over the 10 years and in the grade of MAJ/0-4 for over
2 years and should have been retired in that rank. He indicates that he was commissioned as a warrant officer in June 1987 and continuously served on active duty in a commissioned officer status until being released from active duty (REFRAD) for the purpose of retirement on 31 July 1999. He also comments that he was promoted to the rank of MAJ/0-4 on 1 April 1997, and that he served in that rank for over 2 years prior to retirement. In support of his application, he submits an Oath of Office (DA Form 71) and a copy of the certificate awarding him the Legion Of Merit.

4. The applicant’s military records show that he served on active duty in an enlisted status for 8 years, 9 months, and 29 days, from 10 September 1973 to
8 July 1982, at which time he was honorably discharged, in the rank and pay grade of staff sergeant/E-6, in order to accept an appointment.

5. On 9 July 1982, the applicant was appointed a warrant officer one (WO1) in the USAR; on 3 June 1987, he was commissioned a warrant officer, in the rank and pay grade of chief warrant two (CW2); and on 1 December 1988, he was promoted to chief warrant officer three (CW3).

6. The applicant served on active duty in a commissioned warrant officer status for a total of 4 years, 8 months, and 1 day, until 3 February 1992, at which time he was honorably discharged in order to accept a commission in the rank of
(CPT)/0-3). On 4 February 1992, he concurrently entered active duty as a CPT/0-3 and he was promoted to MAJ/0-4 on 1 April 1997. He continued to serve in that rank and pay grade until being REFRAD for the purpose of retirement on 31 July 1999.

7. Orders Number 117-0001, dated 27 April 1999, issued by Department of the Army, Personnel Service Support Team, MacDill Air Force Base, Florida, authorized the applicant’s REFRAD for the purpose of retirement on 31 July 1999. It also directed his placement on the Retired List on 1 August 1999, in retired grade of CW3/W-3.


8. Army Regulation 600-8-24 (Officer Transfers and Discharges) prescribes the policy and procedure for active duty transfers and discharges. Chapter 6 contains guidance on officer retirements. Paragraph 6-13 contains guidance on the retirement of Physicians Assistants (PA). It states, in pertinent part, that PAs who were on active duty as of 5 December 1990, will have their commissioned warrant officer service applied toward the 10 years of total active commissioned service necessary for retirement as a commissioned officer. It further provides that they may elect to retire in the highest commissioned officer grade or the highest warrant officer grade they held on active duty.

9. Title 10 of the United States Code, section 1293 (10 USC 1293) provides the legal authority for the length of service retirement of warrant officers who have completed between 20 and 30 years of active military service. 10 USC 1371 contains warrant officer retired grade provisions of the law and states, in pertinent part, that unless entitled to a higher retired grade under some other provision of law, a warrant officer retires in the permanent regular or reserve warrant officer grade that he held on the day before the date of his retirement.

10. 10 USC 101b contains legal definitions for personnel in general and provides the definition of a commissioned officer. It states, in pertinent part, that the term commissioned officer includes a commissioned warrant officer. 10 USC 3911 provides the legal authority for the length of service retirement of Regular or Reserve commissioned officers and it states, in pertinent part, that they may retire as commissioned officers if they have at least 20 years of service, 10 years of which have been active duty service as a commissioned officer. 10 USC 1370 provides that in order to be eligible for voluntary retirement in a grade of second lieutenant through MAJ, a commissioned officer of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps must have served on active duty in that grade for not less than
6 months.

11. 10 USC 3991 provides standard retired pay formulas for computing length of service retired pay. Section b, provides a general rule that mandates the use of the most favorable pay formula in computing retired pay. This rule states, in pertinent part, that if a person would otherwise be entitled to retired pay computed under more than one formula he is entitled to be paid under the applicable formula that is most favorable to him. The most favorable pay formula rule of law is further defined in 10 USC 1401.

12. 10 USC 1401 indicates that Public Law 99-348 amended this section of the law to add Section b (use of most favorable formula), which states, in pertinent part, that if a person would otherwise be entitled to retired pay computed under more than one formula or of any other provision of law, the person is entitled to be paid under the applicable formula that is most favorable to them.


CONCLUSIONS:

1. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that his retired grade should be changed to MAJ/0-4 and it finds this claim has merit.

2. By law and regulation, the definition of a commissioned officer includes a commissioned warrant officer. Further, a member retiring for length of service may be placed on the Retired List as a commissioned officer if they had served on active duty in a commission status for 10 or more years. In addition, by regulation, a PA who was on active duty on 5 December 1990 has the option of selecting the highest commissioned officer grade or highest warrant officer grade they held on active duty as their retired grade.

3. In addition, the law provides that members are entitled to be placed on the Retired List in the highest commissioned officer grade in which they satisfactory served on active duty for more than six months if they had completed 10 or more years of active duty service in a commissioned officer status. In addition, the law stipulates that if a member is eligible for retired pay under more than one formula, they are entitled to receive retired pay based on the formula most favorable to them.

4. In providing that an individual be retired in the highest grade satisfactorily held, the law, as outlined in the most favorable pay provisions of 10 USC 1401, clearly intended to provide for the highest amount of retired pay. However, the law in prescribing that a member should receive retired pay based on the pay grade most favorable to them, does not intend that these members must forfeit those other rights and privileges vested in or enjoyed as a result of their having satisfactorily served in a commissioned officer status.

5. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant satisfactorily served on active duty in the rank and pay grade of CW3/W-3 and that the highest rank the applicant was promoted to, held, and satisfactorily served in while on active duty was MAJ/0-4. It also verifies that he served on active duty in a commissioned officer status for more than 10 years, which included his satisfactory service as a commissioned warrant officer. As a result, the Board concludes he was eligible to be initially placed on the Retired List in the rank and pay grade of MAJ/0-4, effective 1 August 1999.

6. In addition, as prescribed by law, the Board finds it would be appropriate to provide the applicant retired pay based on the formula most favorable to him based on his satisfactory active duty service as both a MAJ/0-4 and a CW3/W-3, to include any back pay that may result from applying these most favorable pay formula provisions of the law.


RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was placed on the Retired List in the rank of MAJ, effective 1 August 1999, and by providing him retired pay based on the formula most favorable to him based on his satisfactory active duty service in both pay grades 0-4 and W-3, to include any back pay due as a result of this correction.

BOARD VOTE:

__GDP__ _ _WTM__ __RTD GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  __George D. Paxson__
                  CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID AR2001058576
SUFFIX
RECON YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED 2002/01/24
TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION (GRANT)
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 129.04
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.



Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063470C070421

    Original file (2001063470C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board notes the contention of the applicant that his retired grade should reflect the highest grade he held and while he did not stipulate that his request was to receive the retired rank and pay grade of MAJ/0-4, his application does imply this may be his expectation. By law, members are entitled to be placed on the Retired List in the highest commissioned officer grade in which they satisfactory served on active duty for more than six months if they had completed 10 or more years of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064115C070421

    Original file (2001064115C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    It states, in pertinent part, that a warrant officer of the Army who is retired with less than 30 years of active service is entitled, when his active service plus his service on the Retired List totals 30 years, to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade in which they satisfactorily served on active duty. By law, when their active service plus retired service equals 30 years, warrant officers are entitled to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest commissioned officer...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050015168C070206

    Original file (20050015168C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states he attempted to correct the error via the Army Grade Determination Board and was informed that he was entitled to a grade determination at the time of his disability retirement but now required action by this Board. It states that a member may be retired under this provision of law, upon a determination by the Secretary concerned, that they are unfit to perform the duties of their office, grade, rank, or rating because of physical disability incurred while entitled to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002407

    Original file (20150002407.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides: * Orders Number 210-236 dated 29 July 2010, issued by the Florida Army National Guard (FLARNG), showing the applicant was promoted to sergeant major (SGM)/E-9 with a date of rank (DOR) and effective date of 7 August 2010 * Orders Number 274-026 dated 1 October 2014, issued by the FLARNG, showing the applicant was discharged from the FLARNG and assigned to the Retired Reserve effective 30 January 2015 * ARNG Retirement Points History Statement - Application for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070006209C071113

    Original file (20070006209C071113.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence of record that shows that she served on active duty as a Major. Further, advancement of enlisted members to a commissioned officer rank and pay grade on the Retired List requires that the member actually held and satisfactorily served in that higher commissioned officer grade while on active duty. The evidence of record further shows that while serving on active duty in an enlisted status, the applicant was promoted to MAJ/0-4 in the USAR.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080110C070215

    Original file (2002080110C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states, in effect, that he had satisfactorily served in an enlisted status in a rank and pay grade that would entitle him to a more favorable rate of retired pay than the retired pay he now receives based on his satisfactory service as a 1LT/0-2, which is the highest rank and pay grade he held. A Data for Retired Pay (DA Form 3713), dated 20 March 1990, prepared on the applicant during his processing for non-regular retirement and retired pay confirms that on 3 December 1989,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089639C070403

    Original file (2003089639C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing that the rank of the individual concerned as First Lieutenant on the Retired List; by providing him retired pay based on the pay formula most favorable to him based on his satisfactory service in both pay grades 0-2 and W-2, and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018520

    Original file (20080018520.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his military records to show his retired pay computed on the grade of chief warrant officer four (pay grade W4) rather than captain (pay grade O3). The applicant states, in effect, that he was transferred to the Retired Reserve in pay grade W4. Title 10, USC, section 1371 states that unless entitled to a higher retired grade under some other provision of law, a warrant officer retires, as determined by the Secretary concerned, in the permanent regular...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018687

    Original file (20140018687.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 2002079029C070215

    Original file (2002079029C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states, in effect, that he had satisfactorily served in an enlisted status in a rank and pay grade that would entitle him to a more favorable rate of retired pay than the retired pay he now receives based on his satisfactory service as a WO1, which is the highest rank he held. However, it concludes that denying the applicant retired pay based on the formula most favorable to him based on his satisfactory service as a MSG/E-8 would clearly violate 10 USC 1401 if it resulted in...