| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Thomas A. Pagan | Member | |
| Mr. Harry B. Oberg | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be advanced to the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class/E-7 (SFC/E-7) on the Retired List.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was selected for promotion to SFC/E-7 and was never informed of this selection or given the opportunity to accept the promotion prior to his retirement. He claims that his promotion to SFC/E-7, effective 13 December 1978, was authorized in Orders Number 198-1, dated
1 November 1978, published by the United States Army Military Personnel Center (MILPERCEN), Alexandria, Virginia. In support of his application, he provides an extract of an Army Times newspaper.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He served on active duty a total of 20 years, 6 months, and 9 days and on
31 March 1978, he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD), in the rank and pay grade of staff sergeant/E-6 (SSG/E-6), for the purpose of retirement.
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 SSG/E-6 on 23 June 1970, and this was the highest rank he held while on serving on active duty.
On 24 January 1978, the applicant submitted an application for voluntary retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting to be retired on 1 April 1978, in the rank and pay grade of SSG/E-6. On 25 January 1978, his retirement application was approved by the proper authority.
A Data for Retired Pay (DA Form 3713) on file, dated 27 February 1978, which was prepared during the applicant’s retirement processing, confirms that at that time his active duty grade, retired grade, and the highest grade he attained while serving on active duty were all SSG/E-6.
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 March 1978, he was REFRAD 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 SSG/E-6 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 submitted an extract from an Army Times newspaper, dated 8 May 1978, which contained the names of individuals who were selected for promotion and placed on the SFC/E-7 promotion list. His first and last names were included in this list, however, no social security numbers were listed to provide confirmation that it was actually him.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 12 sets the policy and procedure for the voluntary retirement of soldiers based on length of service. It states, in pertinent part, that retirement will be in the regular or reserve grade the soldier holds on the date of retirement.
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, when their active service plus service on the retired list totals 30 years, to be advanced on the retired list to the highest grade they held and satisfactorily served in while on active duty.
Paragraph 12-8d (Service Obligations-Promotions) states, in pertinent part, that soldiers who have an approved retirement are in a nonpromotable status and will not be promoted unless a withdrawal of retirement is approved.
Paragraph 12-10 contains guidance pertaining to the loss of Department of the Army (DA) promotion list standing upon retirement approval. It states, in pertinent part, that all noncommissioned officers (NCOs), in the ranks SSG/E-6 through master sergeant/E-8 (MSG/E-8), who are on a DA centralized promotion list will lose promotion list standing upon approval of their retirement. It further states that the names of these NCOs will be removed from the promotion standing list and they will retire in the grade they currently hold.
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 advanced to the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on the Retired List because he was selected for promotion to that grade and never given the opportunity to accept it prior to his retirement. However, the Board finds this factor alone does not provide a sufficient evidentiary basis to warrant the requested relief.
2. By regulation, enlisted members retire in the grade they hold on the date of their REFRAD for the purpose of retirement. Further, any NCO with an approved retirement is in a nonpromotable status and if they are on a DA promotion standing list, they will be administratively removed upon retirement approval.
3. The evidence of record clearly establishes that the applicant voluntarily requested retirement, in the rank and pay grade of SSG/E-6, to be effective
1 April 1978, prior to being identified for promotion to SFC/E-7. His promotion selection and placement on the DA standing list occurred subsequent to his retirement being approved and by regulation, this placed him in a nonpromotable status.
4. Since the applicant’s retirement was approved prior to his being selected for promotion, his name should have been administratively removed from the promotion standing list. Therefore, his promotion selection and placement on the DA standing list were erroneous. Further, since he was in a nonpromotable status, his not being afforded the opportunity to accept the promotion prior to retirement does not constitute an error or injustice.
5. By law and regulation, retired soldiers are entitled to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade in which they satisfactorily served while on active duty. The record confirms that the applicant was never actually promoted to, held, or served on active duty in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7. Thus, he does not meet this satisfactory service criteria and he is not eligible for advancement on the Retired List.
6. 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___ __TAP__ __HBO___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001064200 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2001/12/06 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1978/03/31 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Retirement |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 319 | 131.0900 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070113C070402
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 applicant’s voluntary retirement request was approved in May 1978, four months prior to the effective date of his promotion, which placed him in a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059540C070421
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 | CY2002 | 2002078901C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Promotion Orders 205-7, issued by the Department of the Army, U.S. Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM), dated 29 November 1989, authorized the applicant’s promotion to MSG/E-8 with an effective date of 1 January 1990. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s voluntary retirement request was approved in April 1989, eight months prior to the effective date of...
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 | CY2001 | 2001055298C070420
Chapter 7 contained the Army’s enlisted promotion policy and paragraph 7-52 contains guidance on the 2 year service obligation incurred by individuals who were promoted to pay grades E-7, E-8, or E-9, which they were required to serve prior to non-disability retirement. It further stated that any member promoted to such a grade after submitting an application for retirement would be required to submit a written request to withdraw the retirement or to decline the promotion within 15 days...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040003279C070208
The evidence of record confirms this Board directed the actions that resulted in the applicant’s promotion to SFC prior to his REFRAD for retirement. The evidence of record further confirms that based on the recommendation of this Board, the applicant was considered for promotion by a STAB, which resulted in his selection for and promotion to SFC, effective 1 September 2001. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077017C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The DD Form 214 issued to and signed by the applicant on the date of his REFRAD for retirement confirms that he held the rank and pay grade of SSG/E-6 on that date. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075776C070403
It states, in pertinent part, that warrant officer and enlisted members of the Army are entitled, when their active service plus their service on the retired list totals 30 years, to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade in which they served on active duty satisfactorily. By law, soldiers retire in the rank and pay grade they hold on the date of their REFRAD for retirement, and in order to be advanced on the Retired List, a soldier must have satisfactorily served on active...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070459C070402
Ultimately, in February 1988, he was medically retired and placed on the Retired List in the rank and pay grade of staff sergeant/E-6 (SSG/E-6) as a result of his heart condition. During the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff contacted the Promotions Branch, Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM), to determine if the applicant had ever been selected for promotion to SFC/E-7 and placed on a DA promotion list prior to incurring the medical condition that resulted in his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084181C070212
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 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...