RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 13 January 2005
DOCKET NUMBER: AR2004106973
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.
| |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | |Director |
| |Mr, W. W. Osborn, Jr. | |Analyst |
The following members, a quorum, were present:
| |Mr. Walter T. Morrison | |Chairperson |
| |Ms. Eloise C. Prendergast | |Member |
| |Ms. Jeanette R. McCants | |Member |
The Board considered the following evidence:
Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.
Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that he receive Reserve Retired pay as a
sergeant first class (SFC) in pay grade E-7 rather than as a staff sergeant
(E-6).
2. The applicant states that he was reduced in rank because the pay grade
E-7 position in his unit was eliminated. He was demoted through no fault
of his own, but he is being paid as an E-6.
3. The applicant provides a copy of the 16 June 1994 reduction order.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant was inducted in January 1964 He served on active duty,
including infantry service in Vietnam for approximately 7 months and was
released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service in
January 1966. He was transferred to the Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group
(Annual Training) in pay grade E-4.
2. He later became a career infantryman in the Oklahoma Army National
Guard (OKARNG) and was promoted to SFC on 1 May 1990. On 4 September 1992,
the Director of Personnel and Administration, OKARNG authorized the
applicant's retention in an Excess/Overgrade status until 5 September 1993.
After that date he was to be administratively reduced to a grade with an
authorized open position or transferred to the USAR Control Group.
3. On 16 June 1994, the reduction order was eventually issued, but
paragraph 6-44(i) of Nation Guard Bureau (NGB) Regulation 600-200 was
inadvertently cited as the authority. His date of rank as a SSG was
established as 1 October 1978.
4. NGB Regulation 600-200, paragraph 6-44 sets forth causes for reduction
in grade of enlisted members. Subparagraph i applies to erroneous
enlistment grades and states, "Soldiers who enlisted or reenlisted in grade
above those authorized by chapter 2, will be reduced to the pay grade to
which entitled effective the date of their enlistment/reenlistment. Board
action is not required."
5. A 24 August 1994 memorandum notified the applicant that he was eligible
for retired pay at age 60 [a 20-year letter]. He applied for retirement
and, on 2 November 1995, he was separated form the OKARNG and transferred
to the USAR Control Group (Retired). He reached his 60th birthday on 14
May 2002 and is receiving Reserve Retired Pay as a SSG (E-6).
6. Army Regulation 135-180 (Qualifying Service for Retired Pay Nonregular
Service) provides the policy and guidance for USAR and ARNG retired pay.
Paragraph 2-11 specifies that, "Service in the highest grade will not be
deemed satisfactory…if, during the mandatory review of the soldier's
records…it is determined that…(a) Revision to a lower grade was expressly
for prejudice or cause, due to misconduct, or punishment pursuant to
Article 15, UCMJ , or court-martial; or (b) There is information in the
soldier's service record to indicate clearly that the highest grade was not
served satisfactorily. "
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The citation of the wrong authority on the 1994 reduction gives the
impression that the applicant was never actually authorized pay grade E-7.
2. The applicant's record clearly shows, however, that he was promoted to
SFC (E-7) on 1 May 1990 and that he served in that grade until 16 June 1994
when he was reduced to pay grade E-6 through no fault of his own.
3. He should be placed on the Non-Regular Retired List in the rank of SFC
(E-7) and authorized any back pay accruing.
BOARD VOTE:
_WTM___ _ECP___ __JRM__ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all
Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by
showing his rank and pay grade on the Nonregular Retired List as of SFC (E-
7) and paying him any back pay accruing.
_ Walter T. Morrison______
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR20040002845 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON | |
|DATE BOARDED |20040113 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
|DISCHARGE REASON | |
|BOARD DECISION |GRANT |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
|ISSUES 1. | |
|2. | |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
-----------------------
[pic]
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140020048
On 26 January 1988, the OKARNG published Orders 19-14 discharging the applicant from the OKARNG with an under honorable conditions discharge, effective 8 February 1988 and transferring him to the USAR Control Group (IRR), in accordance with paragraph 8-27g of NGR 600-200. On 5 August 1989, Headquarters, 1st Battalion, 377th Infantry Regiment, published Orders 08-01 reducing the applicant from SP4/E-4 to private first class (PFC)/E-3 effective 5 August 1989 in accordance with Army Regulation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018516
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his records to show he was placed on the retired list in the rank/grade of sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7, the highest grade he satisfactorily held, instead of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6. By law, a person granted retired pay will receive such pay in the highest grade satisfactorily held by him or her during his or her entire period of service. The applicant's record should be corrected to show his request for retired pay as an SFC was approved.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006374
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of the orders placing him on the Retired List to show his rank/grade as sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 instead of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 and any due back retired pay in the grade of SFC/E-7. The evidence of record shows the applicant held the rank SFC and voluntarily requested a reduction to SSG. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: * amending Orders Number...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021564
The NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) he was issued shows he completed a total of 21 years of service and 21 years for retired pay. The evidence of record shows the applicant was promoted to SFC/E-7 on 3 March 1977. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. amending Orders P04-804347 issued by U.S. Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis on 2 April 2008 to show his retired rank/grade as...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080000398
The applicant requests, in effect, that her military records be corrected to show she was placed on the retired list in the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 which was the highest grade she held. The applicant contends that her military records should be corrected to show she was placed on the retired list in the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 which was the highest grade she held. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005653
Army Regulation 135-180, paragraph 2-11c states that the Retired Activities Directorate, ARPERCEN [Army Reserve Personnel Center currently known as the Human Resources Command-St. Louis] will screen each retirement applicants record to determine the highest grade held by him or her during his or her military service. The evidence of record shows the applicant was reduced to SSG, E-6 with an effective date of 1 October 1988. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005872
Army Regulation 135-180 (Qualifying Service for Retired Pay Nonregular Service), paragraph 2-11c states the Retired Activities Directorate, Army Reserve Personnel Center (currently designated as Human Resources Command, St. Louis) will screen each retirement applicant's record to determine the highest grade held by him or her during his or her military service. Evidence of record confirms that the applicant satisfactorily served in the INARNG in the rank and pay grade SFC/E-7 from 3 July...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001637
The applicant states, in effect: * he held the rank of SSG for at least 3 years * his military records were lost and as such he was unable to either prove or disprove his contention * a discharge appeals board for the Michigan Army National Guard (MIARNG), convened on 9 May 2014, has since affirmed he was administratively reduced from SSG to SGT due to a change in the unit's Modified Table of Organization and Equipment (MTOE); the board recommended his rank be restored to SSG * on 18 June...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007324
The applicant provides: * U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Orders D-06-036713, dated 4 June 1985 * DD Form 214, ending on 9 February 1983 * ARNG Retirement Points History Statement * Retirement Orders P08-926117, dated 25 August 2010 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. In the applicant's case, the evidence of record shows he was promoted to the rank/grade of SFC/E-7, on 16 January 1980, and he held that grade until 9 February 1983 when he was honorably released from active duty and discharged from the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004845
The applicant states, in effect: * Public Law 230, Title 10, and Section 3964 entitle him to promotion to SFC * The "P" shown in item 13 (Primary Specialty Number, Title and Date Awarded) of his National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) indicates he was promotable 3. In his self-authored statement the applicant contends he should be advanced on the retired list to the highest grade held satisfactorily while on active duty, under the provisions of Title...