Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021879
Original file (20120021879.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	    27 August 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120021879 


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 advancement on the Retired List to the highest grade satisfactorily held.

2.  The applicant states:

* he was medically retired in pay grade E-3
* after he became completely paralyzed and spent 3 months on life support in 2001 it took him 11 years to get through the medical evaluation board process
* his paperwork has been messed up a very long time 
* he has no idea what caused the specific snafu and he does not really care
* he just wants it fixed so he can finally stop filing appeals paperwork with the military and just move on with his life

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his Army National Guard (ARNG) Retirement Points History Statement.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  On 3 March 1997, the applicant enlisted in the Missouri ARNG (MOARNG) in pay grade E-1.  He was advanced to pay grade E-3 on 1 May 1998.  The applicant enrolled in the Simultaneous Membership Program (SMP) and he was promoted to cadet (E-5) on 1 September 1998.

2.  On 28 August 2000, MOARNG Orders 3-1 were published reducing the applicant from pay grade E-5 to pay grade E-3, due to his disenrollment from the SMP.  He was advanced to pay grade E-4 on 1 November 2000.

3.  The applicant's Army Military Human Resource Record contains a DD Form 261 (Report of Investigation-Line of Duty and Misconduct Status), which shows that on 25 July 2001, the applicant developed a febrile illness and flu-like symptoms during annual training at Camp Ripley, Minnesota.  He was initially treated at Fort McCoy and diagnosed with a viral infection.  He was then treated at St. Luke's Hospital, Kansas City, MO where he was diagnosed with Gillian Barre Syndrome (a disorder in which your body's immune system attacks your nerves).  The doctor opined that the applicant's condition was likely caused by a virus contracted during annual training and that it started on 24 July 2001 and ended on 4 August 2001.

4.  The applicant was flagged for Army Physical Fitness Test failure and/or for the "weight control program" on the following dates:

* 10 July 2005
* 25 September 2006
* 14 October 2007
* 6 January 2008
* 10 March 2008
* 2 May 2009
* 4 May 2009

5.  On 2 May 2010, the applicant was reduced to pay grade E-3, due to inefficiency.

6.  The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's release from the ARNG are not available for review with his case.  However, U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency Orders D150-01, dated 29 May 2012, released him from his assignment due to physical disability with a 60 percent disability rating.  The orders show he was placed on the Retired List on 4 July 2012 in pay grade E-3.  These orders also show that he had completed 15 years, 3 months, and 2 days of service for basic pay purposes.

7.  Title 10 of U.S. Code, section 1372 provides the legal authority for the grade to be awarded to members retiring for physical disability.  It states, in pertinent part, that any member of an armed force who is retired for physical disability or whose name is placed on the TDRL is entitled to the grade equivalent to the highest of the following:  

* the grade in which he is serving on the date when his name is placed on the Retired List
* the highest grade in which he served satisfactorily
* the grade to which he would have been promoted had it not been for the physical disability that resulted in retirement

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contentions have been noted.  His supporting evidence has been considered.

2.  The applicant did not satisfactorily hold pay grade E-5.  He was reduced from pay grade E-5 to pay grade E-3, due to his disenrollment from the SMP.  He did not satisfactorily hold pay grade E-4 because he was reduced to pay grade E-3, due to inefficiency.  

3.  The DD Form 261 has been carefully considered.  However, because the applicant’s medical records for the period 2001 – 2012 and his physical disability processing packet (narrative summary, medical evaluation board, and physical evaluation board) are not available, it cannot be determined if his Army Physical Fitness Test and weight control issues were the result of his medical condition.

4.  The highest grade he satisfactorily held was pay grade E-3 and he was properly placed on the Retired List in that grade.  There appears to be no error or injustice in the grade in which the applicant was retired.

5.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant's request should be denied.

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)                                         AR20120021879



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120021879



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011905

    Original file (20140011905.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel argues: * E-9 was the last rank in which the applicant served honorably and he should be restored to it and placed on the Retired List in that grade * the command violated Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) in that no nonjudicial punishment was imposed * the applicant accepted the reduction on advice of his counsel * Army Regulation (AR) 15-80 (Army Grade Determination Review Board and Grade Determination) allows for the restoration of his grade 3. ...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015348

    Original file (20110015348.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He agreed that if he were disenrolled from the ROTC Program for any reason, he would repay his scholarship debt or be ordered to active duty in the rank/grade of PVT/E-1 for an appropriate number of years. Although his 6-year enlistment provides the Government the benefits of his service, had he elected an expeditious call to active duty to repay his debt for breaching his ROTC contract, he would have been assigned against the needs of the Army, in pay grade E-1 without the benefit of any...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000115

    Original file (20140000115.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    b. Paragraph 5-6, Army Regulation 135-178, provides for discharge of a member disenrolled from ROTC/SMP. The CAARNG did not acknowledge his NGB Form 22A, dated 27 June 2006, which corrected his discharge date to 3 October 2005. Refer to Army Regulation 135-178 (Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 12 (15) for discharge for Soldiers medically unfit for retention per Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness).

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005153

    Original file (20140005153.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his records to show he was placed on the Retired List in the rank and grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6. On 7 February 2000, the TXARNG issued Orders 038-207, discharging him from the ARNG and assigning him to the Retired Reserve effective 31 December 1999. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending Orders P03-942379, issued by HRC, dated 14 March 2011, to show he was...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120019207

    Original file (20120019207.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests restoration of his rank/grade to SFC/E-7, the highest rank/grade in which he satisfactorily served in the MOARNG. However, the evidence of record shows the applicant was promoted to SSG/E-6 on 17 April 1973 and served in that rank/pay grade until 4 July 1979. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. amending his retirement orders (Orders P10-928529, dated 19 October 2010) to show he was...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010832

    Original file (20090010832.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A scholarship cadet may be disenrolled only by the Commanding General, U.S. Army ROTC Cadet Command. Army ROTC cadets are required to serve as SMP cadets when participating as non-scholarship ARNG member/U.S. As required by applicable regulation, the effective date of rank is the date the applicant was notified of his disenrollment from the SMP, which was 13 August 2007.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007703

    Original file (20130007703.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The Retired Activities Directorate will screen each retirement applicant’s record to determine the highest grade held by him or her during his or her military service. Therefore, he was correctly placed on the Retired List in the rank and grade of PVT/E-1.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003309

    Original file (20150003309.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 July 1992, VAARNG published Orders 146-57 discharging him from the ARNG and assigning him to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Annual Training) effective 31 July 1992 by reason of being an unsatisfactory participant, in accordance with chapter 8 of National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management). This regulation states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when he or she accrues nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills during a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015388

    Original file (20140015388.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states: * she was processed under the integrated disability system (IDES) and she was permanently retired in the rank/grade of sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 * the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) considered her case and denied her request to be retired in the rank/grade of MSG/E-8 * she was promoted to MSG/E-8 in 2001 and served satisfactorily in that rank/grade; she was also laterally appointed to first sergeant (1SG) * she was the first female 1SG assigned to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002690

    Original file (20130002690.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show he earned 20 qualifying years of creditable service for non-regular retired pay. It appears he is also requesting that, based on the Board granting the above, his retired grade be pay grade E-6. On 1 May 2001, the CAARNG issued Orders 121-1022 discharging him from the ARNG and as a reserve of the Army effective 13 March 2001.