PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:  19 August 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999016856

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Ms. Lee Tinsley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Member	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests correction of his military records to show his retired pay computed on the grade of first sergeant E-8 instead of chief warrant officer two (CW2).

3.  The applicant states that although his highest grade held was CW2, he would receive more pay if his records showed he retired as an E-8, a grade he also satisfactorily held.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was serving in the Florida Army National Guard (FLANG) and was promoted to grade E-8 effective 20 October 1980.
Effective 19 October 1982 he was appointed as a warrant officer in the FLANG.

5.  He was placed on the Army of the United States Retired List (AUS) from the FLANG effective 1 June 1987 in pay grade CW2, his highest grade satisfactorily held.

6.  Title 10 U.S. Code, section 1401 states, in the case of a person who is entitled to retired pay under section 1331, 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.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In providing that an individual be retired in the highest grade satisfactorily held, Congress clearly intended to provide for the highest amount of retired pay.

2.  In providing that he should receive retired pay based on the pay grade most favorable to him, it is not intended that he must forfeit those other rights and privileges vested in or enjoyed by commissioned or warrant officers.

3.  The determination that the highest grade satisfactorily held by the applicant is unjust in that it has deprived him, and will continue to deprive him, of the increased pay which he would have received if he had been retired in pay grade E-8.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that, notwithstanding his placement on the AUS Retired list in the pay grade of CW2, as provided by Title 10, United States Code, sections 1331-1337, the 
retired pay of the individual concerned will be calculated on pay grade E-8, a grade in which he also satisfactorily held as provided by Title 10, United States Code, section 1401.

BOARD VOTE:  

   CF              CA        MM  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

                                           GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                                           DENY APPLICATION

						          Calvin M. Fowler         
						        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999016856	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990819	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  306	129.0400.000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.