| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Ms. JoAnn H. Langston | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Member | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be promoted to master sergeant/E-8 (MSG/E-8) and that he be advanced to that rank and pay grade on the Retired List.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was not selected for promotion to MSG/E-8 after having served in a position authorized that rank and pay grade for two years and earning a Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) for his service in that position. He claims that he believes that he should be advanced to MSG/E-8 on the Retired List after serving in the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class/E-7 for 11 years. He indicates that he was forced to retire during the downsizing of the Army in the early 1990’s when the retention control point (RCP) for an SFC/E-7 was changed from 24 to 22 years.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 30 June 1993, he was released from active duty (REFRAD) for the purpose of retirement. On that date he held the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 and had completed a total of 22 years and 22 days of active military service.
The applicant’s Department of the Army (DA) Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) confirms, in Item 18 (Appointments and Reductions), that he was promoted to the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on 11 July 1982, and that this is the highest rank he held while serving on active duty.
On 15 December 1992, the applicant submitted an application for voluntary retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting to REFRAD for the purpose of retirement on 30 June 1993, in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7. Item 6 (Highest Grade Served on Active Duty) confirms that the highest rank and pay grade he attained while serving on active duty was also SFC/E-7.
On 6 January 1993, the applicant’s REFRAD and placement on the Retired List the following day was directed in Orders Number 3-105, issued by Headquarters, US Army Air Defense Artillery Center, Fort Bliss, Texas. This order also confirms that the effective date of his REFRAD was 30 June 1993, and that his authorized retired rank and pay grade were SFC/E-7.
A Data for Retired Pay (DA Form 3713), dated 25 June 1993, that was prepared on the applicant during his retirement processing, contained the entry SFC/E-7 in Item 2 (Active Duty Grade), Item 3 (Retired Grade), Item 8 (Highest Grade Attained), and Item 10 (Retired Pay). This document also confirms that he was placed on the Retired List on 1 July 1993, and that he had completed a total of 22 years and 22 days of active military service.
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 30 June 1993, he was separated under the provisions of chapter 12, Army Regulation 635-200, for the purpose of 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.
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 have been promoted to MSG/E-8 and advanced to that rank and pay grade on the Retired List based on his having served in a position authorized that rank and pay grade for two years. However, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2. 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. In order to satisfy this requirement, a member must have been promoted to, held, and served in the higher rank and pay grade while on active duty, performing duties in a position authorized a higher pay grade does not satisfy this satisfactory service criteria of the advancement law.
3. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant held the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on the date of his separation and that this was the highest pay grade he attained while serving on active duty. It also verifies that he was never actually promoted to, held, or served in a higher pay grade while he was on active duty, and he has failed to provide independent evidence to the contrary.
4. In view of the facts of this case, the Board concludes that the applicant was properly retired in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 and that he does not meet the satisfactory service provision of the advancement law. Thus, he is not eligible for advancement to a pay grade higher than E-7 on the Retired List.
5. 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.
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
__JHL__ __WTM__ __RWA___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002066460 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/03/14 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1993/06/30 |
| 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 | CY2002 | 2002067164C070402
On 5 May 1993, the applicant submitted an application for voluntary retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting that he be retired on 31 October 1993, in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7. The last promotion recorded in his record is SFC/E-7, with a date of rank of 23 October 1984. The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to the applicant on the date of his separation from active duty, which he authenticated with his signature, confirms that he held the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080375C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On that date, he held the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7. On 3 October 2002, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) denied the applicant’s request for advancement on the Retired List.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059788C070421
By law and regulation, retirement will be in the Regular or Reserve grade the soldier holds on the date of retirement and advancement on the Retired List is only authorized when a member has held and satisfactorily served on active duty in a higher grade. In fact, the applicant’s own evidence, the LTG letter, confirms that the promotion recommendation submitted on him in 1968 was returned without action by the promotion authority. The Board also took special note of the fact that the...
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...
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 | 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 | CY2006 | 20060002888C070205
The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) is void of any orders or documents that indicate the applicant was ever selected for promotion to the pay grade E-8 by a properly constituted promotion selection board, or that he was promoted to a pay grade above E-7 by proper authority while serving on active duty. Further, by law, Soldiers are retired in the rank and pay grade they hold on the date of their REFRAD. It also shows he was never selected for promotion to the pay grade...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076178C070215
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he served as a first sergeant in a position authorized the pay grade E-8 on numerous occasions and his efforts are exemplified in several Enlisted Evaluation Reports and his Army Commendation Medals he received for his performance. In addition, there are no documents contained in his Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) that suggest he ever held or served in a higher pay grade while on active duty. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence,...
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 | 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...