RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        17 April 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060013704


      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. Gerard W. Schwartz            |     |Acting Director      |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Thomas M. Ray                 |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Rea M. Nuppenau               |     |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 his records be corrected to show he is
entitled to receive E-9 retired pay.

2.  The applicant states he was discharged from the Army National Guard
(ARNG) as a Sergeant Major (SGM), E-9 for not meeting medical standards.
He was not allowed to go to phase 2 of the U. S. Army Sergeants Major
Course due to his medical condition.  He had finished phase I.  His medical
condition is service connected from Agent Orange in Vietnam and a coronary
artery bypass.

3.  The applicant provides orders assigning him to the Retired Reserve; a
National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of
Service) for the period ending 30 September 2005; a Texas Military Forces,
Joint Forces Headquarters, Adjutant General’s Department memorandum dated
      18 September 2005; a DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile); a medical
record operation report dated 30 June 2004; a DA Form 1059 (Service School
Academic Evaluation Report); a Department of Veterans Affairs Rating
Decision dated 31 January 2005; retirement orders; a U. S. Army Human
Resources Command – St. Louis (USAHRC – STL) letter dated 21 June 2006; and
a USAHRC – STL letter, dated 8 August 2006, to the applicant’s Senator.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was born on 27 July 1946.  After having had prior
service, he enlisted in the ARNG on 7 July 1983.

2.  State of Texas, Adjutant General’s Department Orders 035-1000, dated
     4 February 2003, promoted the applicant to SGM effective 27 November
2002.  The additional instructions in the orders noted that the applicant
must complete the U. S. Army Sergeants Major Course as a condition of this
promotion.  Failure to meet the condition would cause reduction per
National Guard Regulation 600-200, paragraph 11-56e.

3.  In June 2004, the applicant underwent a coronary bypass operation.

4.  On 18 September 2005, the applicant was given a physical profile of
333221 for heart bypass operation, diabetes, and knee pain.  Also on this
date, Texas Military Forces, Joint Forces Headquarters, Adjutant General’s
Department notified his commander that he was identified as not meeting
medical retention standards for a non-duty related condition and was
pending separation for medical disqualification.  He apparently elected
separation in lieu of referral to a Physical Evaluation Board.
5.  Effective 30 September 2005, the applicant was discharged from the ARNG
and transferred to the Retired Reserve.  His NGB Form 22 shows his rank as
SGM and the standard name line of the orders transferring him to the
Retired Reserve show his rank as SGM.

6.  A DA Form 1059 dated 4 November 2005 shows the applicant was
disenrolled from the U. S. Army Sergeants Major Course due to retirement.

7.  On an unknown date, the applicant applied for retired pay.  Orders
dated      21 June 2006 placed him on the retired list effective 27 July
2006 in the retired grade of SGM.  However, USAHRC – STL letter dated 21
June 2006 informed him that although his highest grade held was that of
SGM, E-9, since he did not complete the U. S. Army Sergeants Major Course
he would be paid in the grade of Master Sergeant, E-8.

8.  Chapter 11 of the National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel
Management) in effect at the time prescribed policy and procedures for
advancement, promotion, lateral appointment, reduction, and restoration for
all Army National Guard of the United States enlisted Soldiers.  Paragraph
11-56e stated Soldiers who failed to successfully complete a
noncommissioned officer education system (NCOES) course that was a
condition of a promotion due to their failure to apply for, enter, meet
standards, or through misconduct or voluntary withdrawal would be reduced
automatically effective on the date the Soldier failed to apply for, enroll
or be enrolled in a class for which selected, failed a course, withdrew
from the course, or on expiration of the time set for completion of the
course.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant accepted a conditional
promotion to SGM knowing he was required to complete the U. S. Army
Sergeants Major Course as a condition of that promotion.  He was fully
aware that failure to meet the condition would cause his reduction per
National Guard Regulation 600-200, paragraph 11-56e.

2.  It is regrettable that the applicant failed to complete the U. S. Army
Sergeants Major Course only because of medical problems.  However, the
governing regulation did not provide for any exceptions.  In addition, he
should have been reduced to Master Sergeant, E-8 when he was disenrolled
from the course.  It appears the applicant may not have been reduced since
his “official” disenrollment did not take place until the DA Form 1059 was
completed on
4 November 2005, two months after he was transferred to the Retired
Reserve.  This resulted in his erroneous placement on the retired list in
the grade of SGM.  However, that mistake was mitigated when USAHRC – STL
determined his retired pay should be based upon the grade of Master
Sergeant, E-8.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__jtm___  __tmr___  __rmn__  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.




                                  __John T. Meixell_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060013704                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070417                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schwartz                            |
|ISSUES         1.       |133.05                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]