| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Margaret V. Thompson | Member | |
| Mr. Eric N. Anderson | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his rank of master sergeant be restored or that his date of rank (DOR) for the pay grade of E-7 be adjusted from 15 August 2002 to 15 April 2001.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that at the time he was serving in the Army National Guard (ARNG) in the rank of master sergeant (E-8), on active duty, he inquired into the possibility of remaining on active duty in the Regular Army. He was informed at the time that he would have to be discharged before he could enlist in the Regular Army and that he could only enlist in the pay grade of E-7. However, his DOR would be 15 April 2001, the date he was promoted to the pay grade of E-8. He goes on to state that he was discharged from the ARNG on 14 August 2001 and enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 August 2001; at which time he was informed that his DOR for E-7 was the date of his enlistment in the Regular Army. He continues by stating that he believes his DOR should be the date he attained the pay grade of E-8 and believes it unfair that he was not allowed to enlist in the pay grade of E-8.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 April 1982 and served on active duty as a multiple launch rocket system crewmember until he was honorably discharged in the pay grade of E-6 on 10 September 1992, under the Fiscal Year 1992 Enlisted Voluntary Early Transition Program. He had served 10 years, 5 months and 10 days of total active service and received a special separation benefit (SSB) payment of $29,355.02.
He enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) upon his discharge (a condition of receiving SSB payment) and remained in the USAR Control Group (Individual Ready Reserve (IRR)) until 12 July 1995, when he enlisted in the New Mexico ARNG (NMARNG). He was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 15 April 1999 and to the pay grade of E-8 on 15 April 2001. He entered active duty on 15 August 2001, as a ARNG E-8, for a period of 1 year (extended active duty tour) and on 11 June 2002, he submitted a request to enlist into the Regular Army.
On 30 July 2002, the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) authorized the applicant to enlist in the Regular Army on 15 August 2002, for a period of 4 years, in the pay grade of E-7. The memorandum authorizing his enlistment also explained that his DOR would be established in accordance with Army Regulation 600-20 and that he was authorized to enlist in the pay grade of E-7, because the strength of the Army, in his military occupational specialty at the pay grade of E-8 was over-strength.
On 14 August 2002, the applicant was discharged from the NMARNG and on 15 August 2002, he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years, in the pay grade of E-7. He indicated by his initials that no promises or guarantees were made to him in connection with his enlistment. His DOR was established as 15 August 2002.
In the processing of this case a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the PERSCOM, Retention Management Division, which opined that at the time the applicant enlisted, his MOS in the grade of E-8 was at 103%, with 52 soldiers pending promotion to the pay grade of E8. The applicant was approved to enter in the pay grade of E-7 in MOS 14S, which was at 99%. Accordingly, he was enlisted at the proper grade and the PERSCOM recommended no change of grade be made.
The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment and he responded to the effect that he was mislead in regards to the DOR he would receive and that he did not understand why he had to be reduced in grade to enter the active components when he had never had a break in service.
Army Regulation 600-20 serves as the authority for computing dates of rank at the time of enlistment. It provides, in pertinent part, that if a Reserve of the Army enlisted soldier serving on extended active duty in the Active Army enlists in the Regular Army, the DOR of the enlisted grade is the date of the Regular Army enlistment.
Army Regulation 601-210 governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army and the USAR. It provides, in pertinent part, that a prior service applicant, last separated from any component or who is a member of a Reserve Component in the grade of E-7 or higher, regardless of years of service, will have an enlistment grade and eligibility determination made by the Commanding General, PERSCOM.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:
1. 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.
2. The applicant applied for enlistment in the Regular Army and based on the needs of the service, was approved for enlistment in the pay grade of E-7. The PERSCOM explained at the time that he was considered for enlistment in the pay grade of E-8; however, there were no vacancies at that time.
3. The applicant had the option at that time to decline the offer and to remain in the Reserve Component in which he was serving at the time. However, he elected instead to accept the Army's offer to enlist in the pay grade of E-7. Therefore, given the circumstances in this case, the Board finds that he was properly enlisted in the pay grade of E-7
4. The Board has noted the applicant's contention that he was promised that his DOR would be backdated and finds no evidence to support his contention. He had an opportunity to make known any such promises at the time of his enlistment and the evidence of record clearly shows that no such promises were made to him. Accordingly, he was properly given a DOR effective the date of his enlistment.
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
___mvt__ ___fe ___ __ena ___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002083395 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/07/15 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 302 | 129.0000/PAY GRD |
| 2. 224 | 112.0200/DOR |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019714
The applicant provides a self-authored letter, dated 2 December 2008; State of New Mexico, Department of Military Affairs, Military Division, Santa Fe, New Mexico (NM), Orders 124-004, dated 3 May 2000; nine DFAS Forms 702 (Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) Military Leave and Earnings Statements (LES)) for the months of March, April, May, June, and July 2001 and January, February, March, and May 2002; DA Form 2166-8 (NCO Evaluation Report) for the period August 2001 through March...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120020640
Adjustment of his date of rank (DOR) to major (O-4) to 17 July 2003. c. ARNG promotion to lieutenant colonel (O-5), year group 2009. d. Waivers of military education requirements for O-5 promotion. On 21 February 2007, the applicant was notified he had been selected for promotion to major by an SSB with a promotion eligibility date of 17 July 2003. Revoking his discharge from the ARNG and as a Reserve of the Army, dated 1 February 2004. b.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140020955
His packet was submitted in July 2012 with the New Mexico State Recognition Board results, dated 20 July 2012, and State Orders for promotion, dated 26 July 2012. The applicant provides copies of the following: * National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 89 (Proceedings of a Federal Recognition Examining Board (FREB)) * Orders Number 208-004 * FY 2013 DA Reserve Component Board Schedule * Special Orders (SO) Number 137 AR * two emails * Suspense for Submission of Applications for the Federal...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052223C070420
PROCEEDINGS BOARD DATE: 6 November 2001 DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001052223 The applicant requests his records be corrected to show his date of rank (DOR) to pay grade E-7 as 1 March 1994. Based on his enlistment in the RA on 12 August 1999, his pay grade E-7 DOR should be adjusted to 21 November 1997 in accordance with Army Regulation 600-20 (Army Command Policy).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001796C070205
The standard time in grade for promotion to 1LT is 2 years or 18 months. The officer’s records will be screened to determine eligibility for promotion to the next higher grade far enough in advance to permit promotion on the date promotion service is completed. While the advisory opinion noted that an updated security clearance and current physical were required at the time the applicant was due for promotion, it is acknowledged that there is no evidence to show he did not meet those...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009877
However, he petitioned the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) for an adjustment of this date to 3 March 2008, the date he completed the warrant officer advanced course (WOAC). National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-101 (Warrant Officers - Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions) states that in order to attend WOAC, a warrant officer must be within one year of promotion prior to enrollment. On 16 September 2008, the Board granted him relief in the form of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072743C070403
On 20 August 1997, the OKARNG issued a NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) honorably discharging the applicant from the OKARNG as a SGT, pay grade E-5, by reason of the individual's request. The investigation further substantiated that: the applicant submitted false information on his application for Army National Guard federal recognition in January 1987 by stating “No” to the question, “Have you ever been arrested or convicted by a civil court of other than minor...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050013466C070206
The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and orders; his AGONM Form 600-1 (Request for Discharge, NMARNG); his NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) and orders; and his ARNG personnel records, in support of his request. The applicant was notified that as stated in Chapter 6-4 of the National Guard Regulation 600-5, Soldiers would be separated without board action and he did not have the right to an appeal or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006794
The advisory official indicated the NGB recommended disapproval of the applicant's request to have his CPT DOR changed from 21 December 2006 to 12 July 2006 because his promotion was based on a position vacancy. This recommendation was based on the promotion regulatory guidance contained in the Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act (ROPMA) for position vacancy promotions which provides that the effective date of an ARNG commissioned officer who is promoted in the State under the position...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001053477C070420
The applicant states, in effect, that his 19 October 2000 promotion orders deny him the pay and allowances he should have been provided based on the promotion effective date directed by the SSB, 27 August 1997. The SSB recommended that the applicant be promoted to the rank of major with a promotion eligibility date of 27 August 1997. The NGB Personnel Division provided an advisory opinion that the applicant is entitled to be promoted to the rank of major effective 27 March 1997 (which...