BOARD DATE: 30 September 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140002295
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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) ending on 30 September 2003 to show his rank/grade as sergeant major (SGM)/E-9.
2. The applicant states his DD Form 214 shows an incorrect rank and grade. It should read E-9 in accordance with Permanent Orders 347-007, dated 13 December 2003, which show his retired grade as SGM. It is the right thing to do for Soldiers.
3. The applicant provides:
* DD Form 214, ending on 30 September 2003
* DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214)
* PO 347-007, dated 13 December 2003
* Certificate of Appreciation
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. 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. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) 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's records show he was born on 20 March 1953.
3. He enlisted in the South Carolina Army National Guard (SCARNG) on 17 September 1971. He served through multiple extensions in a variety of assignments.
4. He served on active duty while in the U.S. Army Reserve and/or ARNG from September 1983 to December 1990, December 1990 to May 1991, and May 1991 to May 1998.
5. In April 1993, SCARNG issued him a Notification of Eligibility for Retired Pay at Age 60 (Twenty-Year Letter).
6. He entered active duty on 1 June 1998. He served in various positions within the ARNG.
7. On 22 January 2001, the National Guard Bureau (NGB) published
Orders 22-36 promoting him to master sergeant (MSG)/E-8 effective 1 December 2000.
8. He retired on 30 September 2003 by reason of sufficient active service for retirement and he was placed on the Retired List on 1 October 2003. His DD Form 214 shows in:
* Items 4a (Grade, Rate, or Rank) and 4b (Pay Grade) - MSG and E-8
* Item 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade) - 2000-12-01
9. On 10 December 2003, SCARNG published Orders 344-826 (amended by Orders 363-887) discharging him from the ARNG and transferring him to the Retired Reserve effective 30 September 2003. The orders listed his retired grade as "MSG."
10. On 13 December 2003, SCARNG published state Orders 347-007 releasing him from the ARNG and transferring him to the Retired Reserve effective 1 October 2003. The orders listed his retired grade as "SGM (Honorary)."
11. There is no indication in his records that he was selected for promotion to SGM, completed the U.S. Army Sergeants Major Course, and/or served in the rank/grade of SGM/E-9.
12. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) at the time established the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. The DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty and provides the individual with documentary evidence of their military service. It is important that information entered on the form should be complete and accurate. Items 4a and 4 show the Soldier's rank/grade at the time of separation and item 12h shows the effective date of rank.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. There is no evidence in the applicant's records and he provides none to show he was selected for promotion to SGM or satisfied the requirements for promotion to SGM, specifically successful completion of the U.S. Army Sergeants Major Course.
2. He bases his contention on a state retirement order that awarded him an "honorary" retired grade of SGM. This is possibly a state honor. However, there is no provision for promotion or retirement with an honorary grade in the governing Army regulation(s). The DD Form 214 is governed by Army Regulation 635-5 (or currently Army Regulation 635-8), not by a state law.
3. In view of the foregoing evidence, he is not entitled to 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) AR20140002295
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140002295
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001111
The applicant requests, in effect, promotion to the rank of sergeant major (SGM) with an effective date of rank in January 2002; all back pay and allowances due as a result of this promotion; and placement on the Retired List in the rank of SGM. The evidence of record in this case confirms that the appropriate regulatory guidance was not used during the promotion selection process that considered and did not select the applicant for promotion to the rank of SGM, and that as a result another...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004208
It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge. The regulation provides for entry of the rank and pay grade at time of separation and the effective date of pay grade at the time of separation or release from active duty. The applicant's DD Form 214 correctly lists his rank/grade and effective date of pay grade.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026207
On 24 December 2002, Headquarters, 78th Division, Edison, NJ, published Orders 02-358-00003 ordering the applicant's honorable discharge from the USAR, effective 30 November 2002, after having achieved maximum authorized years of service as a MSG/E-8 (32 years). The applicant was promoted to CSM on 1 December 1997 but his orders were revoked and he received new orders on 3 March 1998 promoting him to SGM/E-9 contingent upon completion of Sergeant Major's Course with 2 years. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010914
On 4 December 1973, Headquarters, MOARNG, Office of the Adjutant General, published Special Orders Number 144 promoting him to SGM/E-9 under the authority of paragraph 3a of National Guard Regulation (NGR) 624-200 (Appointment and Reductions of Enlisted Personnel) effective 8 December 1973. The policy for grade determination for computation of retired pay required an enlisted member to serve in the higher grade for at least 185 days to qualify for retirement in that grade. However, 11 days...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009206
Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Active Duty Enlisted Promotion) states, in pertinent part, that the date of rank for a Soldier who does not complete the required level of NCOES training will be the previous date of rank successfully held at the reduced grade. The applicant voluntarily applied for retirement prior to completing his promotion ADSO or completing his NCOES for promotion to SGM. On that date, Army Regulation 600-8-19 required the applicant to be reduced to MSG because he had not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003662C070205
However, the WAARNG had discharge orders transferring him to the IRR. Yet, their State had discharge orders transferring him to the IRR. The evidence shows the applicant had been given two deferments for attendance of Phase II of the USASMA.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014553
The applicant additionally provided: a. page 637, unit page number 29, of the PRARNG Element, JFHQ, UMR, dated 1 July 2006, that shows he was assigned as excess (overstrength) in his primary MOS 15P4O to paragraph/line 230C/06, position code MOS 15Z5O, duty position MOS 15Z5O; b. page 648, unit page number 40, of the PRARNG Element, JFHQ, UMR, dated 1 July 2006, that shows SGM C____ O. S____-Y____ was assigned in his primary MOS 15Z5O to paragraph/line 230C/06, position code MOS 15Z5O, duty...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011905
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 | 20110008150
On 26 March 2002, by memorandum, the applicant requested to appear before a Reduction Board. b. Paragraph 7-1b states the Enlisted Promotion System is designed to help fill authorized enlisted vacancies in the NCO grades with the best qualified Soldiers who have demonstrated the potential to serve at the next higher grade. Having been flagged through February 2010 and having submitted a request for retirement, it is not likely he would have been recommended for promotion to SGM.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000135C070206
The applicant provides his orders releasing him from active duty and placing him on the retired list; his orders reducing him from SGM/E-9 to MSG/E-8; and his orders promoting him to SGM/E-9. Orders were published by the Office of The Adjutant General, State of New York which released the applicant from active duty on 31 March 1997 and transferred him to the retirement list in retired grade of MSG/E-8 effective 1 April 1997. The Board determined that the evidence presented does not...