Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000933
Original file (20090000933.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

		IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	14 July 2009  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090000933 


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 Mandatory Removal Date (MRD) for Maximum Age be corrected from 24 January 2002 (the day he turned age 60) to 24 January 2009.

2.  The applicant states his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) shows his MRD as 2002, but his U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) unit showed his MRD as 24 January 2009.  The applicant states that he had applied for an MRD extension when he was assigned to a USAR unit which he left in April 2004 and speculates that the unit may have failed to forward his request.

3.  The applicant provides correspondence between him and an elected member of Congress.  He also submits his DA Form 2B (Personnel Qualification Record) which shows his MRD as 24 January 2009.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's military records show he was born on 24 January 1942.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 October 1961 and was honorably released from active duty on 7 October 1964.  He was assigned to the USAR and had no performance until his discharge on 16 October 1967.

2.  He had a break in service until his commission in the Army National Guard (ARNG) on 10 July 1980.

3.  He entered active duty as a commissioned officer on 31 May 1987 and remained on active duty until 30 September 1993.  He was honorably released from active duty on that date and transferred to a USAR unit.

4.  A review of the integrated Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) shows that on 19 February 2003 the applicant's unit administrator called the (now) Human Resources Command St. Louis (HRC-STL) concerning retaining the applicant beyond age 60.

5.  On 19 February 2003, the United States Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) called the HRC-STL and stated that they noticed that the applicant should have been separated on his 60th birthday.  It was noted that his MRD was listed as being in 2009.  The HRC-STL stated that the USASOC can ask for an MRD extension and fax it to their location for review.

6.  On 7 March 2003, the applicant was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Enduring Freedom with his USAR unit.  He was honorably released from active duty on 16 March 2004.

7.  On 17 February 2005, the applicant was promoted to the rank of colonel, Medical Corps.

8.  Effective 1 August 2008, the applicant was transferred to the Retired Reserve due to completion of 20 or more years of qualifying service for retired pay at age 60.

9.  Title 10, Section 14702(b) states that an officer may not be retained under this section after the last day of the month in which the officer becomes 60 years of age.

10.  Title 10, Section 14703, Authority to retain chaplains and officers in medical specialties until specified age, states that the Secretary of the Army may, with the officer's consent, retain in an active status any Reserve officer assigned to the Medical Corps, but the officer cannot be retained beyond age 67. 

11.  A DA Form 2B is a locally-maintained form.  Unit personnel provide the entries and changes to this form.  A Soldier's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), which contains only those documents which have been verified in accordance with Army regulations, is located on iPERMS.




DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's records show that his unit had realized that the applicant had reached his MRD and had made arrangements with the HRC-STL for the applicant to submit a request for waiver to remain in an active status.  The applicant confirms this in his statement that he submitted a request for extension of his MRD.

2.  Based on the fact that the applicant's unit was mobilized shortly after his unit administrator's discussion with HRC-STL about his MRD, it may be reasonably concluded that the applicant did in fact submit his request for a waiver and that request was either not forwarded by his (then) unit personnel or it was lost at a higher headquarters.  The mobilization process for a USAR unit is labor and time intensive.

3.  While the applicant should have started the waiver process before he reached age 60, and he should have followed up to insure his request for waiver was approved, he did not.  However, he reasonably assumed that his waiver had been submitted and would have been informed if it had been disapproved.  The fact that the applicant's DA Form 2B shows his MRD as 24 January 2009 adds weight to this conclusion.  In addition, the Army effectively validated the applicant's service beyond his MRD by mobilizing and deploying him, by paying him, by letting him continue to attend unit training assemblies, and by promoting him.  

4.  As such, it would be equitable to now correct the applicant's records to show that he was granted a waiver to remain in an active status until age 67.

BOARD VOTE:

_____X___  ___X_____  ____X____  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 he was granted an extension of his MRD for maximum age until age 67.




      _______ _   __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)                                         AR20090000933





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090000933



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019828

    Original file (20090019828.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In May 2001, the applicant was granted a two-year extension based on the needs of the service, which adjusted her MRD to 31 May 2003. Unfortunately, she is now age 69 and has been without a military status for 7 years and by law is now well past the maximum retention age. Regrettably, the applicant is not entitled to be extended past her MRD of 16 June 2003 or retention in the USAR in order to qualify for retired pay and benefits.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012374

    Original file (20080012374.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The American Legion, as counsel for the applicant, requests that: a. all flag/negative actions in the applicant's record since 11 September 2001 be expunged; b. a non-prejudicial statement be placed in the applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) to cover the gap for the Officer Evaluation Report (OER) that he never received for his last year of service in Korea; c. the applicant be afforded promotion consideration to full colonel as if his security clearance had not been...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020976

    Original file (20090020976.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In a 4 November 2003 letter, the commanding officer of the 405th Combat Support Hospital in Newington, CT stated the following: * The 405th Combat Support Hospital and the U.S. Army Reserve ordered the applicant to active duty on 2 October 2003 for 120 days * The applicant is a doctor in the Army Reserve * The applicant is performing active duty outside the United States in support of Operation Enduring Freedom 8. It would be equitable to now correct the applicant's records to show that he...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030307

    Original file (20100030307.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The official added that although the applicant was a two time non-select for promotion to LTC which resulted in either his discharge or transfer to the Retired Reserve, he was placed on the Promotion Selection List, which according to Title 10, U.S. Code (USC), sections 14506 and 14701 would have allowed him to serve until he reached 24 years of commissioned service. Title 10, USC, section 14506 (Effect of failure of selection for promotion: Reserve MAJs of the Army) states, in pertinent...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009890

    Original file (20100009890.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that he was involuntarily retired due to age at the rank of colonel; however, he is being paid as a lieutenant colonel (LTC) because he was unable to serve the required lock-in period. He further states that he had requested a mandatory removal date (MRD) extension which was favorably recommended by the MRD board but final action never occurred. While he was retired in the rank of colonel, he did not serve the required 6 months in grade and thus is being paid in the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110022266

    Original file (20110022266.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests: * Extension of his mandatory removal date (MRD) to 30 September 2011 * Service credit and recalculation of retired pay to include all service completed between his current MRD of 7 May 2010 through the adjusted MRD * Correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to include the creditable service as well as award of the Meritorious Service Medal 2. The applicant states: * His MRD was 7 May 2010 prior to changing his status from...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004162C080407

    Original file (20070004162C080407.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that he receive credit for United States Army Reserve (USAR) service he performed after he reached age 60; and that his retirement pay be changed accordingly. This HRC retirement official further states that AMEDD officer MRD extension procedures are well known; however, it appears the applicant submitted his request to his chain of command in August 2005, which was just three months prior to his MRD and retirement date, and his request was processed...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019226

    Original file (20080019226.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 May 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080019226 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. In a second record of contact, the applicant's unit contacted HRC-STL on 14 July 2008 and requested the status of the applicant's MRD extension packet. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. showing that he was transferred to the Retired Reserve on 30 June 2007; b. showing that he was placed...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010265

    Original file (20100010265.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests reconsideration of the Board's denial of his previous request as follows: a. reinstatement to active duty until he can obtain a new surgical appointment and complete his surgery and recuperation; b. cancellation of his retirement until he has completed his surgery and recuperation; c. restoration of pay and allowances that the Army recouped as an indebtedness prorated through 13 June 2008, the date that the unexecuted portion of his active duty orders A-06-810144 were...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017881

    Original file (20080017881.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 February 2008, HRC-St. Louis officials requested revocation of the applicant’s mobilization Orders M-10-702757 due to the fact that he would turn age 62 on 8 April 2008 and must be removed from active service not later than 60 days after the date in which he turns age 62. On 14 April 2008, HRC-St. Louis published Orders C-04-807106, releasing the applicant from active duty by reason of completion of 20 or more years of Reserve duty and reassigning him to the Retired Reserve on 7 June...