| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Lester Echols | Member | ||
| Ms. Yolanda Maldonado | Member |
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests, in effect, advancement to the rank and pay grade of sergeant major/E-9 (SGM/E-9) on the Retired List.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that he served satisfactorily in a dual capacity as a primary Brigade and Battalion Career Counselor from December 1984 through May 1986. He claims this position was previously held by a SGM. He also indicates that other positions he held included first sergeant and battalion operations sergeant.
3. In support of his application, the applicant provides a copy of his Personnel Qualification Record (DA Forms 2 & 2-1), evaluations reports for the positions
in question, three certificates of achievement, a certificate for the Army Achievement Medal (AAM), a packet requesting attendance at the Recruiter/Retention course, and a copy of his separation document
(DD Form 214).
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant’s record shows that on 1 November 1990, 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 he had completed 20 years, 9 months, and 1 day of active military service.
2. 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 10 April 1985, and that this is the highest rank he held while serving on active duty.
3. 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. 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.
4. A Data for Retired Pay (DA Form 3713), dated 1 February 1990, 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 Grade). This document also confirms that he was placed on the Retired List on 1 November 1990, in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7.
5. 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 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 from active duty.
6. On 3 July 2003, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) staff returned the applicant’s request for advancement on the Retired List without action by the AGDRB. The reason the applicant’s request was not referred to the AGDRB was that he retired as a SFC/E-7, the rank and pay grade he held on the date of his REFRAD, and his records failed to show he ever held a higher grade.
7. 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).
8. 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 AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant’s contention that he should be advanced on the Retired List because he successfully performed in positions authorized the higher grade was carefully considered. However, although it is clear the applicant served in positions authorized a higher grade, this factor alone does not satisfy the legal requirements necessary to support advancement on the Retired List.
2. 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 while on active duty, as determined by the Secretary of the Army.
3. In order to satisfy the criteria for advancement, 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 meet the satisfactory service criteria of the advancement law.
4. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant held the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on the date of his REFRAD, 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 evidence to the contrary.
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.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
LE___ __AO___ __YM_______ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003091703 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2004/01/22 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1990/11/01 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Retirement |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 310 | 131.0000 |
| 2. 319 | 131.0900 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
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 | 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 | 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 | CY2002 | 2002076732C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 1 December 1969, the applicant submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting that he be REFRAD for the purpose of retirement on 30 November 1970, in the rank and pay grade of SSG/E-6. The evidence of record confirms that the highest rank and pay grade the applicant attained while serving on active duty was SSG/E-6.
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 | CY2002 | 2002074764C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be advanced on the Retired List to the highest rank and pay grade in which he satisfactorily served on active duty. 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 | 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 | CY2002 | 2002077590C070215
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: 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. 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 | CY2001 | 2001059179C070421
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. There are no provisions of law or regulation that provide for the advancement on the Retired List of an enlisted member who served in a commissioned officer grade in the ARNG not on active duty. The record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073643C070403
On 10 February 1982, after serving as a SSG/E-6 for almost 5 years, he was promoted to sergeant first class/E-7 (SFC/E-7), which is the highest rank and pay grade he held while serving on active duty. On 23 May 2002, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) convened to consider the applicant’s advancement on the Retired List, and it denied advancement on the Retired List based on the applicant’s general court-martial conviction and the resultant sentence which included his...