| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member | |
| Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher | Member |
2. The applicant requests, in effect, that his retired rank and pay grade be changed from sergeant first class/E-7 (SFC/E-7) to master sergeant/E-8
(MSG/E-8), that his rank and pay grade on the Retired List be corrected to MSG/E-8, and that he receive all back pay and allowances due as a result.
3. The applicant states, in effect, the DD Form 214 issued to him on the date of his REFRAD for the purpose of retirement, 29 February 2000, incorrectly shows his retired grade as SFC/E-7. He claims that under the existing regulatory policy he should have been retired in the highest rank he held and in which he satisfactorily served on active duty, MSG/E-8, and from which he was administratively reduced not as a result of his own misconduct. In support of his application, he provides his retirement order, his voluntary reduction order from MSG/E-8 to SFC/E-7, his MSG/E-8 promotion order, and an order assigning him to an authorized MSG/E-8 position.
4. The applicant’s military records show that he was a member of the Army National Guard (ARNG) of California who continuously served on active duty in an Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) status from 1 October 1980 to 29 February 2000.
5. On 26 September 1984, the applicant was ordered to full time duty (State) in an AGR status to perform recruiting duties. On 19 February 1987, he was promoted to the rank and pay grade of MSG/E-8 in military occupational specialty (MOS) 00E50 and on 1 February 1992, he was administratively reduced from MSG/E-8 to SFC/E-7 voluntarily, in order to accept an AGR position in MOS 00E40.
6. Orders Number 293-230, dated 20 October 1999, by issued by the State of California, Office of the Adjutant General, Sacramento, California, directed the applicant’s honorable discharge from the Army National Guard (ARNG), effective 29 February 2000, and his assignment to the Retired Reserve.
7. Orders Number 301-242, dated 28 October 1999, issued by the State of California, Office of the Adjutant General, Sacramento, California, authorized the applicant’s REFRAD on 29 February 2000 and his placement on the Retired List, effective 1 March 2000, in the retired grade of rank of SFC/E-7.
8. On 29 February 2000, the applicant was REFRAD under the provisions of chapter 12, Army Regulation 635-200 for the purpose of retirement. The
DD Form 214 issued to him at this time indicated that he held the rank and pay grade of SFC.E-7 and that he had completed a total of 22 years and 28 days of active military service.
9. On 1 June 2001, the applicant submitted a request to the Office of the Adjutant General, California ARNG, asking that his retirement orders be amended to change his retirement grade of rank from SFC/E-7 to MSG/E-8 in accordance with the applicable regulation. This request was approved, and Orders Number 164-255, dated 13 June 2001, were published amending Orders Number 301-242 to change the applicant’s authorized retired grade of rank from SFC/E-7 to MAG/E-8.
10. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 12 sets policies and procedures for voluntary retirement because of length of service. Paragraph 12-3 contains the general provisions of law governing retirement and it states in pertinent part, that ARNG soldiers serving on active duty at the time of their retirement, in a grade lower than their highest active duty enlisted grade, who were administratively reduced, not as a result of their own misconduct, will retire in the highest grade in which they satisfactorily served on active duty.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that his retired grade should have been MSG/E-8 instead of SFC/E-7 and it finds this claim has merit. By regulation, ARNG soldiers who retire from active duty are entitled to retire in the highest grade in which they satisfactorily served on active duty.
2. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was promoted to MSG/E-8 on 19 February 1987 and that he satisfactorily served on active duty in that grade until 1 February 1992, at which time he was administratively reduced to
SFC/E-7, not as a result of his own misconduct.
3. In addition, the record clearly shows that ARNG officials recognized that the retired grade of rank of SFC/E-7 originally assigned the applicant was in error. This is evidenced by their action to correct this error by publishing an amendment to the original retirement order. This amendment changed the applicant’s retired grade of rank to MSG/E-8. Therefore, the Board concludes that the requested relief is warranted in this case.
4. Although the Board has no authority to correct State ARNG records, governed under Title 32, the Board is of the opinion that so far as the Department of the Army is concerned, it would be in the best interest of justice to correct the ARNG records of the individual concerned 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 held the rank and pay grade of
MSG/E-8 on the date of his REFRAD for the purpose of retirement and discharge from the ARNG; that he was placed on the Retired List as a MSG/E-8; by issuing him a corrected discharge order and separation document that reflects this change; and by providing him all back pay and allowances due as a result of this correction to his retired grade.
BOARD VOTE:
__FNE __ __BJE__ __KYF __ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
___Fred N. Eichorn __
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2001058720 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2001/11/08 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 2000/02/29 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 C12 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Retirement |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 306 | 129.0400 |
| 2. 319 | 139.0900 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020817
On 30 August 2002, the NYARNG published Orders 242-002 reducing him in rank from MSG/E-8 to SFC/E-7 effective 30 August 2002 in accordance with National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management), paragraph 11-54 (voluntary reduction). Army Regulation 135-180 (ARNG and Army Reserve Qualifying Service for Retired Pay Nonregular Service) states that a person granted retired pay will receive such pay in the highest grade (temporary or permanent) satisfactorily held by him or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058741C070421
The applicant’s military record shows that he was a member of the Army National Guard (ARNG) of Puerto Rico and that he served on active duty in an Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) status from 4 August 1981 through 31 March 1999, at which time he was REFRAD for the purpose of retirement. Paragraph 12-3b(1) contains the general provisions of law governing retirement and it states in pertinent part, that ARNG soldiers serving on active duty at the time of their retirement, in a grade lower than...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110008150
On 26 March 2002, by memorandum, the applicant requested to appear before a Reduction Board. b. Paragraph 7-1b states the Enlisted Promotion System is designed to help fill authorized enlisted vacancies in the NCO grades with the best qualified Soldiers who have demonstrated the potential to serve at the next higher grade. Having been flagged through February 2010 and having submitted a request for retirement, it is not likely he would have been recommended for promotion to SGM.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110016267
In arriving at the highest grade satisfactorily held, if the Soldier was transferred to the Retired Reserve on or after 25 February 1975, the retired grade will be that which an enlisted Soldier held while on active duty or in an active Reserve status for at least 185 days or 6 calendar months. The evidence of record shows the KSARNG issued orders promoting the applicant to SFC/E-7 on 4 June 1998. As a result, the Board recommends that the State Army National Guard and the Department of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005773
In order to support a change to the applicant's grade at the time of retirement or his advancement on the Retired List, there must be evidence that the applicant completed the satisfactory service requirement to complete 2 years of active duty service in the higher grade of MSG. Further, the evidence of record and independent evidence submitted by the applicant while showing he was twice promoted to 1SG/MSG and twice administratively reduced to SFC, not due to his own misconduct, while...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055123C070420
On 6 July 2000, the Chief of Personnel Division, Office of the Chief, Army Reserve (OCAR) denied the applicant’s request for a waiver of the 2-year promotion ADSO under the provisions of Army Regulation 140-158 and indicated that this regulation prohibited AGR soldiers from applying for retirement during their 2 year promotion ADSO period unless they qualified for retirement based on completing 30 or more years of service or qualified for retirement in the higher pay grade based on prior...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016684
The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request for correction of his military records as follows: * constructive service credit for active duty from 6 November 1997 (date erroneously discharged) to 29 July 2007 (date properly discharged) * consideration for promotion to sergeant major (SGM)/E-9 2. The Board recommended denial of the application that pertains to promoting him to the rank/grade of SGM/E-9; however, the Board recommended all state Army National Guard records and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015712
The applicant submitted an unsigned copy of a National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 34-1 (Application for AGR Position) that shows he provided information for use in determining his eligibility for this vacancy announcement. However, there is no evidence that the applicant was higher on the promotion list than the Soldier who was selected for the position. Furthermore, at the time of the position vacancy announcement, the applicant had completed over 22 years of creditable active military...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060100C070421
On 20 December 1989, a panel of this Board denied the applicant’s request to have his records corrected to show he was promoted to the pay grade of E-9, effective 1 March 1983. In effect, this decision was based on the fact that the Board disagreed with the ARPERSCOM position that there was no evidence to show the applicant was reduced to SFC/E-7 at the time he voluntarily entered active duty in that rank and pay grade. Further, there is no evidence contained in the record that shows that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011335
The applicant provides: * Retired Orders Number C-05-494313 and amendment * DA Form 1506 (Statement of Service-for Computation of Length of Service for Pay Purposes) * Marriage certificate * Enlisted Record Brief * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), ending on 31 January 1999, 31 October 1994, 12 September 1990, and 30 March 1993 * National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) * Orders 02-182-00032, reduction to SFC/E-7 *...