| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Ms. JoAnn H. Langston | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Member | ||
| Ms. Barbara J. Lutz | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be advanced to the rank and pay grade of first sergeant/E-8 (1SG/E-8) on the Retired List.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he accepted an administrative reduction from 1SG/E-8 to the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class/E-7 (SFC/E-7),
in order to accept an Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) active duty tour.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He served on active duty a total of 20 years and 19 days until 31 October 1991, at which time he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD), in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7, for the purpose of retirement.
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 1SG/E-8 on 29 June 1982, while serving in the Army National Guard (ARNG), not on active duty.
Orders Number 183-129, dated 30 September 1982, issued by the Military Department of Arkansas, Office of The Adjutant General, Arkansas ARNG, authorized the applicant’s voluntary reduction from 1SG/E-8 to SFC/E-7. This action allowed him to accept an active duty AGR position in that rank and pay grade. His record contains no indication that he was ever promoted back to 1SG/E-8, and/or that he served in that rank and pay grade subsequent to his entry on active duty in an AGR status.
The record contains a properly constituted separation document (DD Form 214), which was signed by the applicant on the date of his retirement. This document shows that on 31 October 1991, he was REFRAD under the provisions of
Title 10 of the United States Code, section 3914, 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.
On 19 August 2002, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) considered the applicant’s case. It denied the applicant’s advancement to 1SG/E-8 on the Retired List because he had never served in that rank and pay grade while on active duty, which is required under the provisions of the advancement law.
Title 10 of the United States Code, section 3964 provides the legal authority for advancement of warrant officers and enlisted members on the Retired List. 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.
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 10 USC 3961.
Paragraph 12-6 contains the regulatory guidance on the advancement of enlisted soldiers on the Retired List, as authorized by 10 USC 3964. It states, in pertinent part, that 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. It indicates that advancement on the Retired List is limited to retired soldiers who held a higher grade and successfully served in that higher grade while on active duty. 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.
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 1SG/E-8 on the Retired List. However, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2. 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, when their active duty service and time on the Retired List equals
30 years. Service in a higher rank and pay grade in a Reserve Component, not on active duty, does not meet the satisfactory active duty service requirement of the law.
3. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant voluntarily accepted a reduction to the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 in order to enter active duty in an AGR status. It also verifies that subsequent to his entry on active duty in an AGR status, he was never promoted to, held, or served in a rank and pay grade above SFC/E-7. Therefore, the Board finds his advancement to 1SG/E-8 on the
Retired List is not warranted.
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
__JHL __ __ RVO _ __BJL __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002069343 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/08/22 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1991/10/31 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 C12 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Retirement |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 319 | 131.0900 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060098C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: 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, as determined by the Secretary of the Army, when their active service plus service on the retired list totals 30 years.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019999
He adds that he believes the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) should advance him on the retired list to 1SG/E-8 and that this Board should refer to Title 10, U.S. Code, section 3963. On 31 January 2007, the applicant petitioned the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) for advancement on the retired list. He subsequently accepted a voluntary reduction to SFC/E-7 on 27 December 1988 and was ordered to full-time National Guard duty, where he remained in the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064460C070421
The applicant’s military record shows that he was a member of the Army National Guard (ARNG) and that he entered active duty in an Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) status on 16 August 1981. The applicant’s Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1) confirms, in item 18 (promotions and reductions), that he was promoted to the rank of 1SG/E-8 on 19 May 1981, and that he satisfactorily served in that rank and pay grade until 6 January 1984, at which time he was administratively reduced to the rank...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083189C070215
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade in which he satisfactorily served while on active duty. On 16 March 1992, the applicant submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting that he be REFRAD for the purpose of retirement on 31 January 1993, in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7. 3 The evidence of record confirms that the highest rank and pay grade the applicant attained while serving on active duty was SFC/E-7.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010180
He provides copies of his: * Master Sergeant (MSG), E-8, promotion orders * 1SG Lateral Appointment Orders * Reduction Orders to pay grade/rank Sergeant First Class (SFC), E-7 * Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) Certificates and a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award) of the MSM * Army National Guard (ARNG) Current Annual Statement * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * Retired Reserve Orders * ARNG Enlistment Document * Letter for the Army Grade Determination...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018426
On 1 March 2004, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) considered his request for advancement on the Retired List to E-8, as the highest grade he satisfactorily held. The evidence or record shows he was convicted by a special court-martial for wrongful marijuana usage. Army Regulation 15-80 provides that service in a higher grade will normally be considered unsatisfactory if reversion to a lower grade results from misconduct.
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 | CY2002 | 2002081518C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The evidence of record confirms that the highest rank and pay grade the applicant attained and held while serving on active duty was SFC/E-7. Further, given the applicant’s record also gives no indication that he was ever selected for, promoted to, or held a higher rank and pay grade while serving on active duty.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019224
The applicant requests correction of his records to show he retired in the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7. The applicant contends his military records should be corrected to show he retired in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 because prior to receiving NJP he honorably held the rank of SFC for over 13 years. Therefore, his service in the rank of SFC was unsatisfactory, and his advancement to a rank above SGT on the Retired List would not be appropriate.