Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001444
Original file (20120001444.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  19 July 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120001444 


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 change of the effective date of his advancement on the Retired List to the rank/grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 from 24 November 2008 to 1 December 1998 and payment of back pay to that date.

2.  The applicant states he was advanced on the Retired List effective
24 November 2008 and only received back pay from that date; however, he should have been advanced effective 1 December 1998.

3.  The applicant provides:

* a one-page letter explaining his application
* his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) for the period ending 5 August 1977
* his DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 1 July 1992 and 30 November 1998
* a letter from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), Fort Knox, KY, dated 24 August 2011

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provided that applications for correction of military records must be filed with 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 6 August 1974 and served until he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) on 5 August 1977 in the rank/grade of specialist four (SP4)/E-4.

3.  He again enlisted in the RA on 3 January 1978 and he was promoted to SSG/E-6 on 8 July 1983.  He served until he was honorably discharged on 1 July 1992 under the Fiscal Year 1993 Enlisted Voluntary Early Transition Program and Special Separation Benefit (SSB) Program.  He was paid $55,197.45 in SSB benefits.

4.  On 14 March 1997, he again enlisted in the RA in the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5 for a period of 2 years.

5.  On 30 November 1998, the applicant was retired by reason of sufficient service for retirement and he was transferred to the Retired List effective
1 December 1998 in the rank/grade of SGT/E-5.  He completed 20 years and
7 days of creditable active service.  His basic active service date (BASD) was computed as 24 November 1978.

6.  On 25 July 2011, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) determined that the highest grade in which the applicant satisfactorily served for the purpose of computation of retired pay was SSG/E-6.

7.  On 24 August 2011, HRC determined that the applicant’s date of advancement on the Retired List should be 24 November 2008, the applicant’s 30-year mark.

8.  On 18 November 2011, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) notified the applicant that he was entitled to back pay to 24 November 2008 based on the effective date of his advancement on the Retired List.

9.  Title 10, U.S. Code, provides, in pertinent part, that enlisted personnel may be advanced in grade to the highest grade satisfactorily held, as determined by the Secretary of the Army, upon completion 30 years of service.  This service may consist of combined active service and service in the USAR Control Group (Retired).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that the date he was advanced on the Retired List to the pay grade of E-6 should be 1 December 1998 instead of 24 November 2008 has been noted and found to lack merit.

2.  While the applicant had previously served in the pay grade of E-6, he was not serving in the pay grade of E-6 when he transferred to the Retired List in 1998.  He completed 20 years and 7 days of total active service and his BASD at the time of his retirement was 24 November 1978.

3.  Accordingly, the applicant was properly advanced on the Retired List to SSG/E-6 effective 24 November 2008, the date he completed 30 years of combined active service and service in the USAR Control Group (Retired).  He has failed to show that an error or injustice exists in his case.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____x___  ____x___  ____x___  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.



      ____________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)                                         AR20120001444



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120001444



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070001959

    Original file (20070001959.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The evidence of record also shows that this correction resulted in the applicant being credited with 2 additional days of active service based on his active duty training service during the period 23 – 24 April 1977. Thus, the applicant provides evidence to substantiate his claim that his DD Form 214, with an effective date of 31 December 1991, does not reflect credit for the 2 days of active duty training during the period 23 – 24 April 1977. However, the applicant’s DD Form 214, with an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003382

    Original file (20130003382.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    c. When Military Personnel (MILPER) Message Number 08-033, subject: (Updated) AAA-294 Enlisted Promotion Report – Automatic List Integration Section for Staff Sergeant) was issued on 1 February 2008, he was never informed of its provisions and he was not aware of any action by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) to put him on the standing list for promotion to SSG/E-6. The company commander, first sergeant, and the battalion command sergeant major formed negative opinions of him...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120014138

    Original file (20120014138.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests payment of Aviator Continuation Pay (ACP) under the Fiscal Year 2011 (FY11) ACP Program for 152F/152H Aviators with targeted basic active service date (BASD) - 19 to 24 years based on correction to the eligibility dates of BASD from 1 October 1987 to 30 September 1992 to 1 October 1987 to 30 September 1993. The applicant states there was a mistake on the eligibility date in Military Personnel (MILPER) Message 11-054. The Army is offering an ACP Program for AH-64A/D...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010827

    Original file (20110010827.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He provides: * DA Form 638-1 (Recommendation for Award (For Other Than Valor) of Army Achievement Medal, Army Commendation Medal, and MSM) * MSM Certificate, dated 28 March 1994 * Orders for the AGCM (6th Award), dated 19 May 1994 * 1994 DD Form 214 * Letter from the Army Human Resources Command (HRC), dated 30 December 2004, advancing him on the retired list * Letter from the Army Review Boards Agency, 5 January 2005 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. He was retired in pay grade E-5 on 31 July...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058405C070421

    Original file (2001058405C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 3 December 1998, the soldier submitted a DA Form 4187 requesting retirement on 1 September 1999, which reflects that he intended to retire with 22 years of AFS. The opinion further states that the applicant was aware for over 4 months before retirement that he would not have 22 years of AFS at his requested retirement date, and while soldiers are authorized to request change or withdrawal of an approved retirement, there is no evidence that the applicant requested to change or withdraw...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006244

    Original file (20120006244.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    c. He recently received correspondence from the recorder of the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) informing him that it appears he should have been placed on the Retired List in the grade of E-7 and he should apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) for review of his case. 10 USC, section 3964 (Higher grade after 30 years of service: warrant officers and enlisted members), provides that each retired member of the Army covered by subsection (b) who is...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130022143

    Original file (20130022143.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states: * upon her enlistment in the Regular Army (RA), her prior U.S. Marine Corps SGT date of rank (DOR) was not calculated as "20030301 minus 10 months" * upon reaching her unit, the 14th Engineer Battalion, she tried repeatedly to fix the error so she could attend the Warrior Leader Course (WLC) * she was unable to attend the WLC due to her DOR being 20070809 instead of 20040114 * she was told she was not senior enough [and] could not fix DJHS (unknown acronym) screen...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030500

    Original file (20100030500.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, his retirement DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected: * in Item 12a (Date Entered AD [Active Duty] This Period) * his rank be corrected in Items 4a (Grade, Rate, or Rank) and 4b (Pay Grade) He also requests he be advanced on the retired list to his highest grade satisfactorily held. The applicant's records contain four DD Forms 214 covering his 20-plus years of service: * 19710928 – 19721017 * 19721018 – 19770202 *...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029921

    Original file (20100029921.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In effect, he requests to be advanced on the retired list to the highest grade held. Therefore, the applicant’s records should be corrected to show he was placed on the retired list in the rank/grade of SSG/E-6, effective 25 November 2010, the date he turned 60 and became eligible to receive retired pay. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. amending Orders P10-929149, dated 29 October 2010, to show he was...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005406

    Original file (20120005406.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's military personnel records do not contain any evidence that shows he was promoted to SSG (E-6) subsequent to 5 October 1978. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time the applicant retired from active duty, provided the authority for the separation of Soldiers from the Active Army. Records show the applicant was promoted to SSG (E-6) on 10 December 1974 and that he received a DD Form 214 documenting his honorable service in that grade during the period from 30 March...