Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007703
Original file (20130007703.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

	

		BOARD DATE:	  19 December 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130007703 


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 that his records be corrected to show he was placed on the Retired List as a staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6.

2.  The applicant states he earned the rank of SSG.  He attended the schools and went as far as attending the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course.  His wife left while he was attending school so he kind of gave up.  

3.  The applicant provides a three-page self-authored statement, letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and a National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 23A (Army National Guard (ARNG) Current Annual Statement).  

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  After having had prior service in the U.S. Air Force and in the Regular Army, the applicant enlisted in the ARNG on 23 May 1991.  He was promoted to SSG/E-6 on 25 January 1996.

2.  A review of his Army Military Human Resource Record reveals the following history of promotions and reductions:

	a.  reduced from SSG/E-6 to sergeant (SGT)/E-5 effective 29 July 1997 under the authority of National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management), paragraph 6-44a (Inefficiency);

	b.  reduced from SGT/E-5 to specialist (SPC)/E-4 effective 22 May 2000 by reason of misconduct;

	c.  promoted from SPC/E-4 to SGT/E-5 effective 31 July 2002;

	d.  reduced from SGT/E-5 to SPC/E-4 effective 13 February 2003 by reason of misconduct; and 

	e.  reduced from SPC/E-4 to private (PVT)/E-1 effective 27 May 2003 by reason of misconduct.

3.  He was discharged from the ARNG and transferred to the Retired Reserve in the rank and grade of PVT/E-1 effective 31 December 2004.  

4.  On 29 September 2012, he was placed on the Retired List in the rank and grade of PVT/E-1.

5.  He provides a three-page self-authored statement in which he narrates certain experiences while in the military and points out that he took care of Soldiers and, therefore, he deserves to be on the Retired List in the rank of SSG/E-6.  He contends that he attended schools with pride and that in the 20 years he was in the service he was never late nor missed a day and never failed a physical fitness test.

6.  He also provides a letter from the VA which shows he is currently receiving service-connected disability compensation and an NGB Form 23A showing his highest grade held as E-6.

7.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 3961(b), states that, unless entitled to a higher retired grade under some other provision of law, a Regular or Reserve of the Army not covered by section 3961(a) (which discusses commissioned officers) who retires other than for physical disability retires in the regular or reserve grade that he holds on the date of his retirement.

8.  Army Regulation 135-180 (Qualifying Service for Retired Pay Nonregular Service), paragraph 2-11 (Computation of Retired Pay) provides that a person granted retired pay will receive such pay at an annual rate equal to 21/2 percent of the active duty annual basic pay which the individual would receive if serving on active duty, on the effective date of granting of retired pay, in the highest grade (temporary or permanent) satisfactorily held during his or her entire period of service.  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.  In arriving at the highest grade satisfactorily held, the following criteria will apply:

	a.  If the Soldier was transferred to the Retired Reserve or discharged on or after 25 February 1975, retired grade will be that grade which a commissioned officer or enlisted Soldier held while on active duty or in an active reserve status for at least 185 days or six calendar months. 

	b.  Service in the highest grade will not be deemed satisfactory and the case will be forwarded to the Secretary of the Army’s Ad Hoc Review Board for final determination of the Soldier’s retirement grade if, during the mandatory review of the Soldier’s records by the Retired Activities Directorate, it is determined that any of the following factors exist:

		(1)  Reversion to a lower grade was expressly for prejudice or cause, due to misconduct, or punishment pursuant to Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice or court-martial; or

		(2)  There is information in the Soldier’s service record to indicate clearly that the highest grade was not served satisfactorily.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that his records should be corrected to show he was placed on the Retired List as a SSG/E-6 has been carefully considered.  

2.  The applicant held the rank of SSG; however, the available records show he was reduced to the rank and grade of SGT/E-5 due to inefficiency, reduced to the rank and grade of SPC/E-4 due to misconduct, reduced to the rank and grade of PVT/E-1 due to misconduct, and that he served in that rank until his retirement.  

3.  By statute, an enlisted Soldier retires in the grade that he holds on the date of his retirement.  The applicant held the rank and grade of PVT/E-1 on the date of his retirement and he has not shown that his reduction in rank and grade was in error or unjust.  Therefore, he was correctly placed on the Retired List in the rank and grade of PVT/E-1.

4.  Based on the foregoing, there is no basis to grant the 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)                                         AR20130007703



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130007703



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120012089

    Original file (20120012089.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 16 April 2007, the immediate commander indicated the applicant had missed drills on 3 and 4 February 2007, 9, 10, and 11 March 2007, and 13, 14, and 15 April 2007; and that he (the applicant) was reported in an absent without leave (AWOL) status and had failed to notify the unit that he could not attend or provide an explanation. It appears after having accumulated over 9 unexcused absences, his chain of command initiated separation action against him under the provisions of chapter 13...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003466

    Original file (20120003466.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his records to show he retired from the Army National Guard (ARNG) in the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5 instead of specialist (SPC)/E-4. In the case of a person who is entitled to retired pay under section 12731 of this title, the retired pay base is the monthly basic pay, determined at the rates applicable on the date when retired pay is granted, of the highest grade held satisfactorily by the person at any time in the armed forces. As a result, the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010745

    Original file (20070010745.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Soldiers in the grades of E-5 through E-9 could request to appear before a reduction board. The applicant's record shows he served on active duty for 9 years, 6 months, and 25 days in the rank of SGT with a date of rank of 1 June 1972 when he was discharged from the Regular Army on 8 May 1978. Upon completion of this period of active duty, he was released to the USAR and the DD Form 214 issued on 17 July 1991 shows his rank as specialist/pay grade E-4.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001943

    Original file (20110001943.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    d. He states he held the rank of SSG for 13 years, which was well over the necessary time for him to retire in the highest pay grade he held (i.e., SSG/E-6). A National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) shows the applicant was separated from the ARNGUS and UTARNG on 30 March 1992 and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement) under the provisions of National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management),...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010831

    Original file (20110010831.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2009 | 20090009457

    Original file (20090009457.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    When he was reduced, he was not provided an opportunity to have his case heard by a reduction board. The applicant’s records further show he enlisted in the AZARNG for a period of 3 years in the rank/grade of SSG/E-6 on 11 June 1981. The evidence of record shows that the applicant enlisted in the AZARNG in the rank/grade of SSG/E-6 on 11 June 1981.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013481

    Original file (20100013481.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 12 September 2007, the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, MO, published Orders P09-791175 retiring the applicant and placing him on the Retired List in his retired rank/grade of SGT/E-5 effective 23 July 2007, the date he turned age 60, in accordance with Title 10, U.S. Code, section 12731. In the applicant's case, the evidence of record shows he was promoted to SSG/E-6 on 12 April 1971 and held that grade until his honorable discharge on 25 March 1974. As a result, the Board...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018865

    Original file (20140018865.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 4 August 2014, the Army Grade Determination Review Board convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 15-80 (Army Grade Determination Review Board and Grade Determinations). d. The temporary grade to which he would have been promoted had it not been for the physical disability for which he is retired, if eligibility for that promotion was required to be based on cumulative years of service...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078787C070215

    Original file (2002078787C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. In support of this action, the commander listed several incidents of the applicant’s misconduct. As an exception, ARNG soldiers serving on active duty at the time of their retirement, in a grade lower than their highest enlisted active duty grade, who were administratively reduced not as a result of their own misconduct, will retire in the highest enlisted grade in which...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017986

    Original file (20140017986.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    As new evidence, the applicant provides a statement of support, dated 30 September 2014, wherein (Retired) Brigadier General (BG) RLT, stated, in part: a. There is no evidence and the applicant hasn't provided any evidence that shows these orders were issued in error. There is no evidence and the applicant hasn't provided any evidence that shows these orders were issued in error.