IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 29 July 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080005534
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests in effect, that his records be corrected to show he was placed on the retired list in the highest grade held.
2. The applicant states that documents submitted by the Indiana Army National Guard, shows his highest pay grade held was specialist, E-4. However, he held the pay grade of staff sergeant, E6 for years and sergeant first class, E-7 two times. His highest grade held was for at least 12 continuous months. He states that the grade of E-4 was held prior to his retirement from the Army National Guard not during his term of service. He does not have any copies of his promotion orders promoting him to grades E-6 and E-7 before he entered on active duty in 1975.
3. The applicant provides a copy of NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) for the period ending 8 October 1975, Military Department of Indiana, Special Orders Number 18, dated 28 January 1976 and Military Department of Indiana, Special Orders Number 82, dated 29 April 1975.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant's military personnel record shows he enlisted in the Army National Guard on 9 January 1965. He completed the necessary training and was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman). He served with the Army National Guard continuously until he was honorably separated on 8 October 1975.
2. On 9 October 1975, the applicant entered the Regular Army. He was promoted to pay grade E-5, effective 29 January 1977. He served on active duty from 9 October 1975 to 5 October 1979. He was honorably discharged on
5 October 1979, in the pay grade E-5. He entered the Army National Guard on 13 October 1979 for 1 year in pay grade E-5. He was promoted to pay grade
E-6 on 30 November 1979.
3. The applicant's military personnel record shows he entered active duty as a Guardsman on 23 October 1981. He was promoted to pay grade E-7, effective 24 September 1982.
4. Military Department of Indiana Orders Number 174-22, dated 30 August
1983, shows that the applicant was ordered to active duty in an Active Duty Guard/Reserve (AGR) status for the period of 24 October 1983 to 23 October 1986. He was ordered to AGR status in pay grade E-7.
5. Subsequently, Military Department of Indiana Orders Number 111-26, dated
3 June 1986, shows that the applicant was ordered to full time duty (State) in an AGR status for the period of 24 October 1986 to 23 October 1987, in pay grade
E-7.
6. The applicant was honorably discharged from the Army National Guard and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Retired Reserve), St. Louis, Missouri, on 1 September 1988. His NGB Form 22 shows the pay grade E-4, with a date of rank of 22 July 1988.
7. U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Letter Orders Number
P02-802016, dated 13 February 2006 shows that the applicant was placed on the retired list in pay grade E-4, effective 31 May 2006.
8. The applicant's records do not contain any record of adverse actions that can explain the reason for the reduction in pay grade. The applicant may have taken a reduction to pay grade E-4, in order to continue in the Indiana Army National Guard.
9. Title 10 of the United States Code, section 3964, provides the legal authority for advancement on the Retired List. It states, in pertinent part, that retired
Soldiers are entitled to, when their active service plus service on the Retired List totals 30 years, to be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade they held and in which they satisfactorily served while on active duty as determined by the Secretary of the service concerned.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends he should be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade held, because he was an E-6 for several years and an E-7 two times.
2. The statute provides that a Soldier who is retired for 20 years or more of active duty may be advanced on the Retired List to the highest grade he satisfactorily held while on active duty when the Soldier reaches 30 years of service (active duty plus time on Retired List). The applicant was assigned to a Retired Reserve status on 1 September 1988 with 20 or more creditable years of service for retirement. He was placed on the retired list in the grade of E-4, effective 31 May 2006. Since the applicant did not retire for 20 or more years of active duty, there are no provisions by statute to advance the applicant in grade on the Retired List.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
____X___ ___X____ ___X___ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
1. 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.
2. The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation. The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.
_ ___X____ ___
CHAIRPERSON
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080005534
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080005534
4
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
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 | CY2007 | 20070011336
The letter from U.S. Army Personnel Command shows that the applicant's request was approved and he was advanced on the retired list to the highest rank and grade satisfactorily held, master sergeant E-8, effective 16 August 2001 (calculated to be 30 years). Title 10, U. S. Code, section 3964 provides that warrant officers and enlisted members may, when their active service plus their service on the retired list totals 30 years, be advanced on the retired list to the highest grade in which...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013806
The applicant requests the records of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to reflect he retired in pay grade E-7, the highest rank he ever held. The evidence of record shows the FSM served in the Army National Guard in pay grade E-7; however, he would not have been eligible for advancement on the Retired List to pay grade E-7 until he had a total of 30 years of combined active service and service on the Retired List. At the time of the FSM's retirement he had...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010831
Having had prior active enlisted service from 2 August 1965 to 1 August 1968 and 13 January 1970 to 18 May 1974 (he was discharged as a specialist five (SP5)/E5), the applicant's records show he enlisted in the Massachusetts ARNG (MAARNG) on 8 March 1979 for 3 years in the rank/grade of SGT/E-5. Title 10, USC, section 3963 (Highest grade held satisfactorily: Reserve enlisted member reduced in grade not as a result of the member's misconduct) states a Reserve enlisted member of the Army...
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068810C070402
Paragraph 12-3b(1) contains the general provisions of law governing retirement and it states in pertinent part, that ARNG soldiers serving on active duty at the time of their retirement, in a grade lower than their highest active duty enlisted grade, who were administratively reduced, not as a result of their own misconduct, will retire in the highest grade in which they satisfactorily served on active duty in accordance with Title 10 of the United States Code, section 3963 (10 USC 3963). ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060100C070421
On 20 December 1989, a panel of this Board denied the applicant’s request to have his records corrected to show he was promoted to the pay grade of E-9, effective 1 March 1983. In effect, this decision was based on the fact that the Board disagreed with the ARPERSCOM position that there was no evidence to show the applicant was reduced to SFC/E-7 at the time he voluntarily entered active duty in that rank and pay grade. Further, there is no evidence contained in the record that shows that...
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 | CY2001 | 2001061864C070421
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that while serving in the AGR Program for the California Army National Guard (CAARNG), he was unjustly discharged from active duty prior to his expiration of term of service (ETS). Likewise, the Interstate Transfer Request (NGB Form 22-4-R) submitted by the applicant simply indicates transfer to the ARARNG. Furthermore, the Board finds that in the absence of evidence to show that he was being transferred from one AGR position to another AGR position, he was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013111
The applicant states he should have been placed on the Retired List in the pay grade of E-7. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. The applicant was on active duty serving in the pay grade of E-6 at the time he retired.