| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be promoted to the rank and pay grade of warrant officer one/W-1(WO1/W-1) and that he be advanced to that rank and pay grade on the Retired List.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that while serving in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), in extremely sensitive and complex military intelligence operations, he was frocked to the rank of WO1/W-1 and served in that grade for approximately one year. In support of his application, he provided a local travel document that refers to him as a WO1-W-1 and documents related to his request for appointment as a warrant officer.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 31 August 1975, he was released from active duty (REFRAD) for the purpose of retirement. On that date he held the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class/E-7 (SFC/E-7) and had completed a total of 20 years and 12 days of active military service.
The applicant’s Department of the Army (DA) Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) confirms, in block 18 (Appointments and Reductions), that he was promoted to the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on 13 October 1969, and this was the highest rank he held while serving on active duty. The applicant reviewed this record on 18 April 1974 and he verified that the information contained therein was correct on that date.
On 3 March 1975, the applicant submitted an application for voluntary retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting to be retired on 1 September 1975, in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7, and his application was approved by the proper authority on that same date.
A Data for Retired Pay (DA Form 3713), dated 7 March 1975, that was prepared on the applicant during his retirement processing, verified that his active duty grade and the highest grade he attained while on active duty was SFC/E-7. It also confirmed that he would be placed on the Retired List , effective
1 September 1975, and that his retired pay grade would also be SFC/E-7.
The record also contains a properly constituted separation document
(DD Form 214), which was authenticated by the applicant with his signature on the date of his REFRAD. This document shows that on 31 August 1975, he was separated under the provisions of chapter 12, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of length of service retirement. It further confirms that he held the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on the date of his separation and that on the following day he was placed on the Retired List in that rank and pay grade.
In support of his application, the applicant submits a travel document issued on a local United States Army Vietnam (USARV) form, dated 1 May 1972, that indicates that his grade was WO1. However, there are no other official documents on file in his Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) that show he was ever promoted or appointed to this rank and pay grade. He also provides documents issued by Department of the Army (DA) that confirm his request for appointment as a warrant officer was denied on two separate occasions, first in 1969 and again in 1972.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 12 sets policies and procedures for voluntary retirement of soldiers because of length of service. Paragraph 12-3b states, in pertinent part, that retirement will be in the Regular or Reserve grade the soldier holds on the date of retirement as directed in Title 10 of the United States Code, section 3961 (10 USC 3961).
Paragraph 12-6 (Advancement on the Retired List) contains guidance on the advancement of soldiers on the Retired List. It states, in pertinent part, that retired soldiers are entitled to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade they held and in which they satisfactorily served on active duty when their active service plus service on the retired list totals 30 years. The legal authority for this action is provided by Title 10 of the Untied States Code, section 3964
(10 USC 3964).
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 Board notes the applicant’s contention that he should be promoted to the rank and pay grade of WO1/W-1 and advanced to that rank and pay grade on the Retired List because he served in that grade while on active duty. However, the Board finds this factor alone does not provide a sufficient evidentiary basis to warrant the requested relief.
2. By law and regulation, enlisted members retire in the grade they hold on the date of their REFRAD for the purpose of retirement. Further, they are only entitled to advancement on the Retired List when the Secretary of the Army has determined that they satisfactorily served in the higher rank and pay grade while on active duty. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was never actually promoted to or never held the rank and pay grade of WO1/W-1 while he was on active duty.
3. In order to satisfy the satisfactory service provision of the advancement law, a member must have been promoted to, paid in, satisfactorily held, and served in the higher pay grade while on active duty. Serving in a position authorized a higher rank and pay grade alone does not satisfy this requirement of the law and is not a basis for advancement. Thus, the Board concludes there is insufficient evidence to support either promoting the applicant to WO1/W-1 or for advancing him to that rank and pay grade on the Retired List.
4. 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 this requirement.
5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's 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
__FNE __ _ _TSK __ __JTM __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001062145 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/01/10 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1975/08/31 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 C12 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Retirement |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 310 | 131.0000 |
| 2. 319 | 131.0900 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063318C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he should be advanced on the Retired List to the highest rank and pay grade in which he served on active duty under the provisions of Title 10 of the United States Code, section 3964 (10 USC 3964), which in his case is SFC/E-7. On 23 January 1968, the applicant submitted an application for voluntary retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057694C070420
The applicant’s Department of the Army (DA) Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) confirms, in block 18 (Appointments and Reductions), that he was promoted to the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on 21 February 1975, which is the highest rank he held while on active duty. On 24 August 2001, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) denied the applicant’s request to be advanced to the rank and pay grade of MSG/E-8 on the Retired List. The evidence of record confirms that the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066460C070402
It further confirms that he held the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on the date of his separation and that on the following day he was placed on the Retired List in that rank and pay grade. By law and regulation, enlisted soldiers are retired in the rank and pay grade they hold on the date of their REFRAD, and retired soldiers are entitled to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade in which they satisfactorily served while on active duty, as determined by the Secretary of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091703C070212
On 8 January 1990, the applicant submitted an application for voluntary retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting a retirement date of 31 October 1990, in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7. It states, in pertinent part, that retired soldiers are entitled to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade they held and in which they satisfactorily served on active duty when their active service plus service on the retired list totals 30 years. By law, enlisted soldiers are retired in the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064713C070421
On 3 May 1963, the applicant submitted an application for voluntary retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting to be retired, in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-6. However, this appointment order does not contain an authorization to promote the applicant to a pay grade above E-6. By law and regulation, enlisted soldiers are retired in the rank they hold on the date of their REFRAD and retired soldiers are entitled to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade in which they...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082165C070215
On 30 January 2001, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) considered the applicant’s case and determined that the highest grade in which he satisfactorily served for the purpose of computation of retired pay was SFC/E-7, and that the date he became eligible for advancement on the Retired List would be determined by the Army Reserve Personnel Command (ARPERSCOM). By law, members retire in the active duty grade they hold on the date of their REFRAD for retirement. The law does...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066462C070402
As a result, the Board recommended, in effect, that all required actions be accomplished in order for the applicant’s record to be corrected to show he remained on active duty through 31 August 1990, at which time he was honorably released from active duty for the purpose of voluntary retirement, and that on 1 September 1990, he was placed on the Retired List in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7. The Data for Retired Pay (DA Form 3713), dated 6 January 1993, prepared based on the Board’s 28...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062148C070421
The applicant’s Department of the Army (DA) Form 24 (Service Record), that documents his period of service from 11 November 1950 to 30 November 1962, confirms in section 1 (Appointments, Promotions, or Reductions), that he was promoted to the rank and pay grade of SP5/E-5 on 1 June 1958 and that this was the highest pay grade in which he served while on active duty. It further confirms that he held the rank and pay grade of SP5/E-5 on the date of his separation and that on the following day...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074792C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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: The evidence of record confirms that the highest rank and pay grade that the applicant was promoted to, held, in which he satisfactorily served while on active duty was SFC/E-7.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065290C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. It further confirms that he held the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on the date of his separation, and that on the following day he was placed on the Retired List in that rank and pay grade. There are no provisions of law or regulation that provide for the advancement of an enlisted member who served in higher rank and pay grade in a Reserve Component, not on active duty.