RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        8 November 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070008335


      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.

|     |Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano          |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Barbara J. Ellis              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Jose A. Martinez              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Chester A. Damian             |     |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, in effect, that his discharge from the United
States Army Reserve (USAR) be voided and that he instead be transferred to
the Retired Reserve.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that in January 2005, he signed and
returned a form in which he indicated his desire to be removed from an
active USAR status because he had completed in excess of 20 qualifying
years for retirement.  He claims that since he completed the necessary time
for retirement, he assumed he would be transferred to the Retired Reserve.
He states that now that he is applying for retirement benefits, he just
learned from United States Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis (HRC-St.
Louis) personnel officials that he was in fact discharged from the USAR and
not transferred to the Retired Reserve.  He now requests his record be
corrected to show he was transferred to the Retired Reserve instead of
being discharged so that his retirement pay is not adversely impacted.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentary evidence in support of
his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s record shows that after serving on active duty in an
enlisted and warrant officer status from 2 September 1966 through 1
September 1970, the applicant entered the USAR on 2 September 1970, and
served in various capacities in the USAR from that date through 28 February
2005, the date of his discharge.

2.  A Chronological Statement of Retirement Points (ARPC Form 249-2-E) on
file in the applicant's record shows he earned 4200 creditable points and a
total of
23 qualifying years of service for retirement.

3.  On 28 April 1995, the United States Army Reserve Personnel Center
(ARPERCEN) published a 20 Year Letter notifying the applicant he had
completed the required years of service necessary to qualify for retired
pay at age 60.

4.  On 28 February 2005, HRC-St. Louis published Orders Number D-02-506904,
directing the applicant’s honorable discharge from the USAR on 28 February
2005.

5.  On 15 August 2007, HRC-St. Louis published Orders Number P08-790150,
which directed the applicant's placement on the Retired List, effective
16 February 2006, in the rank of Chief Warrant Officer Four (CW4).

6.  In connection with the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was
obtained from HRC-St. Louis Chief, Transitions and Separations.  This
official stated that the applicant's request is based on his belief that
his discharge would cause him to lose retired pay.  However, the retired
pay scale, effective
1 January 2007, for a CW4 with 30 years or more of service for longevity
remains the same.  He states that prior to 1 January 2007, the pay scale
was maximized at 26 years service for longevity.  As a result, the
applicant will suffer no lose in retired pay based on his discharge status
between 28 February 2005, the date of his discharge and 16 February 2006,
the date he was placed on the Retired List and his retired pay entitlement
began.

7.  On 20 September 2007, the applicant was provided a copy of the HRC-St.
Louis advisory opinion in order to have the opportunity to comment on or
rebut its contents.  To date, he has failed to reply.

8.  Army Regulation 140-10 (Assignments, Attachments, Details, and
Transfers) prescribes policies, responsibilities, and procedures to assign,
attach, detail, remove, or transfer USAR soldiers.  Chapter 7 contains
guidance on removal from active status and paragraph 7-1a indicates that
Soldiers removed from active status will be discharged or transferred to
the Retired Reserve upon their request if they are eligible.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s request that his USAR 28 February 2005 USAR discharge
be voided and that his record be corrected to show that he was instead
transferred to the Retired Reserve on that date in order to prevent his
loss of retired pay was carefully considered.  However, the evidence of
record confirms and he admits, his discharge was based on his voluntary
request to be removed from an active Reserve status, and was accomplished
in accordance with applicable regulations.  There is no evidence to suggest
he was denied the option of transferring to the Retired Reserve at the time
of his discharge.

2.  The applicant is advised that his discharge vice Retired Reserve status
between 28 February 2005 and 16 February 2006, has not resulted in his
receiving a lesser amount of retired pay, as confirmed by the HRC-St. Louis
advisory opinion.  As a result, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis
to support granting the requested relief.
3.  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 FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__BJE___  __JAM __  __CAD__  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.




                                  ____Barbara J. Ellis_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070008335                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/11/08                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |2005/02/28                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 135-178                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Vol Req                                 |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.       |128.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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