Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007471
Original file (20140007471.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		
		BOARD DATE:	  11 December 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140007471 


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 an adjustment of his retired pay from SPC/E-4 to SFC/E-7.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the Retirement Pay Department did not consider his DA Form 2339 (Application for Voluntary Retirement).

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), DA Form 2339, promotion order, and orders placing him on the retired list.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 27 August 1987.  He successfully completed training and held military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman).  He was honorably discharged on 19 March 1996.  The highest rank/grade he attained during this enlistment was SSG/E-6.  The applicant enlisted again in the Regular Army on 15 October 1997.

2.  Orders 41-37, issued by U.S. Army Human Resources Command, dated 
10 February 2005, shows the applicant was promoted to the rank/grade of SFC/E-7.
 
3.  On 16 April 2013, a general court-martial at Shaw Air Force Base, SC, found the applicant guilty of larceny of printer toner cartridges, stealing seven printer toner cartridges, and violating a general regulation.  As a result he was sentenced to a forfeiture of pay in the amount of $3,640 dollars and reduction to the rank/grade of SPC/E-4 effective 30 April 2013. 

4.  Orders 323-1327, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center and Fort Jackson, Fort Jackson, SC, dated 19 November 2013, released the applicant from active duty and placed him on the Retired List on 1 April 2014, in the retired rank/grade of SPC/E-4.

5.  His DD Form 214 shows he was retired in the rank/grade of SPC/E-4 on 
31 March 2014 due to sufficient service for retirement.  He was credited with a total of 25 years and 9 days of creditable active duty service.  His DD Form 214 further shows his effective date of pay grade as 2013 04 30 
(30 April 2013).
  
6.  Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation (FMR), volume 7B (Military Pay Policy and Procedures-Retired Pay), chapter 3 (Gross Pay Computation), section 030112 (Exception to High-36 Month Retired Pay Computation for Members Retired Following a Disciplinary Reduction in Grade) states:

     a.  Members or former members who entered the Uniformed Services on or after 8 September 1980 will have their retired pay base computed using the high 36-month average, except for the members described as follows, whose retired pay base is based on the final basic pay of the grade prescribed in title 10 U.S.C. 1406, rather than the highest 36-month average of basic pay

     b.  In the case of an enlisted member retired within 3 years after having been reduced in grade as prescribed in subparagraph 030112.A.1 (as a result of a court-martial sentence) and who was not subsequently promoted to a higher enlisted grade (or appointed to a warrant or commissioned grade), the retired pay base will be computed using the final basic pay rather than the high 36-month average.  If, however, the member is subsequently promoted to a higher enlisted grade (or appointed to a warrant or commissioned grade), then the member’s retired pay will be computed using a high 36-month average computation.  The computation will use the final 36-months of basic pay, except for the months in which the member served in a grade higher than the grade in which retired.  The basic pay for such months shall be the rates that would have applied to the 
member at that time if serving in the grade in which retired.




DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Evidence shows the applicant did hold the grade of SFC/E-7.  However, on the day before he retired he held the grade of SPC/E-4 following a reduction due to a general court-martial conviction.

2.  There is no indication that he was subsequently promoted to a higher grade.

3.  The applicant’s contention that his retired pay should be based on the average of the highest 36-month average is found to be without merit.  

4.  He retired within three years after being reduced in grade and was not subsequently promoted to a higher grade; therefore, he is excluded from the high 36-month retired pay computation.  His retired pay will be based on his final basic pay.  

5.  In view of the foregoing, 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)                                         AR20140007471



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140007471



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130017978

    Original file (20130017978.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states: * both the Military Retirement Pay Coordinator at Fort Knox, KY and the Ohio Army National Guard (OHARNG) Active Guard Reserve (AGR) Finance Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) calculated his retirement pay at $3907.00 monthly; however, he is only receiving $3315.00 * his retired pay calculation should be based on pay averaging $6148.23 monthly, not the current based average of $5184.90 * he held the rank/grade of SGM/E-9 for 35 months, from 1 February 2010 to 17 January...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00382

    Original file (BC-2006-00382.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of his request, applicant provide a promotion recommendation letter, Retirement Special Order #002260 and DoD Financial Management Regulation Vol 7B, Chapter 3, dated August 2005 Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. The basic pay for such months shall be the rates that would have applied to the member at that time if serving in the grade in which retired (SrA). In April 2006 DFAS reviewed his pay records and concluded that his retired pay was in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008252

    Original file (20090008252.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides a DFAS letter, dated 15 September 2008, which essentially states that as a result of his transfer from the TDRL to the Permanent Disability Retired List (PDRL) he was entitled to receive retired pay computed by one of two methods. The evidence of record shows that the applicant is currently receiving monthly compensation from the VA as a result of his disability. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013636

    Original file (20100013636.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The evidence clearly shows he was retroactively promoted from the rank/pay grade of SFC/E-7 to MSG/E-8 with an effective date and date of rank of 28 June 2006. The evidence shows DFAS made a partial correction to his MILPAY record by paying him for the difference in entitlements between SFC/E-7 and MSG/E-8 during the period 28 June 2006 through 31 August 2008, the date he retired. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008406

    Original file (20140008406.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The letter stated an inquiry by the IG revealed his E-7 retired pay was calculated using the base pay rate applicable to his years of service for the last 36 months prior to his retirement. The DFAS official stated the applicant retired on 1 October 2006 in the rank of SFC with 24 years and 17 days of service for retired pay. The evidence of record shows at the time of his placement on the Retired List on 1 October 2006 the applicant had served a total 20 years, 10 months, and 4 days of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007449

    Original file (20130007449.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) to show that the amount of his retired pay is based on his last three years of service. The available evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant had attained the rank of SFC/E-7 in 2005 and had served in that grade until his reduction to SSG/E-6 as a result of court-martial in 2010. Statute requires that Soldiers who retire within 3 years of their reduction in grade due to misconduct will have...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150004547

    Original file (20150004547.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He is retiring from active duty on 1 June 2015 with over 21 years of military service. He was promoted to SFC on 1 December 2003 while serving on active duty as a member of the USAR and he remained on active duty as an SFC until he enlisted in the RA in the rank of SSG. Title 10 U.S. Code, section 3964, states retired members of the Army who are retired with less than 30 years of active service are entitled, when their active service plus their service on the Retired List totals 30 years,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00944

    Original file (BC-2011-00944.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The evidence supporting the allegations against him is all circumstantial and the video surveillance tapes do not actually show him removing or replacing any stickers. The applicant is in error in stating that the absence of direct video evidence showing his alleged sticker-swapping offenses is proof that they were not committed at all. After considering the matters raised by the applicant, the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062148C070421

    Original file (2001062148C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s Department of the Army (DA) Form 24 (Service Record), that documents his period of service from 11 November 1950 to 30 November 1962, confirms in section 1 (Appointments, Promotions, or Reductions), that he was promoted to the rank and pay grade of SP5/E-5 on 1 June 1958 and that this was the highest pay grade in which he served while on active duty. It further confirms that he held the rank and pay grade of SP5/E-5 on the date of his separation and that on the following day...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070113C070402

    Original file (2002070113C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded: The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s voluntary retirement request was approved in May 1978, four months prior to the effective date of his promotion, which placed him in a...