MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           16 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999022967

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

	Mr. Richard H. Allen		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson	
	Mr. Orville W. Troesch Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Christopher J. Prosser		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In two applications, retirement from active duty on 
1 December 1989 in the highest pay grade he held, pay grade E-5.  

APPLICANT STATES:  Essentially, that he retired in December 1989, but his retired pay is at the pay grade E-4 level.  The highest grade he served in was pay grade E-5,.  He submits a request for help from his United States Senator and the advice from the Department of the Army to apply to this Board, a copy of a NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service from the Pennsylvania Army National Guard (PAARNG) issued on 30 November 1989, two DD Forms 2l4 (Report of Separation from Active Duty/Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) covering two periods of active service from December l970 through November l976 and from July l985 through November l989 and several hand-written inquiries as to the status of his case. 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  Limited military personnel records are available to the Board.  However, those records that are available show:

He had prior honorable enlisted service in the Army National Guard (ARNG) from 30 May 1959 through 6 May 1963, of which 6 months and 23 days was active duty, presumably for basic combat and advanced individual training.  The highest pay grade he appeared to have attained during this period was pay grade E-3.

He then had honorable service in the Regular Army from 7 May 1963 through 
30 November l976.  The highest pay grade he attained during this period of service was pay grade E-5, with a date of rank from 13 April 1969.  His military occupational specialty (MOS) was MOS 11B (Infantryman).  He appears to have served in Germany and in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) during this period of service.  

He next had honorable service in the Vermont Army National Guard (VTARNG) from 11 December 1976 through April 1984.  He retained his pay grade of 
E-5 and his primary MOS was as a cook (MOS 94B) and his secondary MOS was MOS 11B.  

On 13 May l984, he requested a voluntary reduction in pay grade from pay grade 
E-5 to pay grade E-4 so that he could perform full time training duty (FTTD) with the Pennsylvania Army National Guard (PAARNG) from 28 April –30 September l984.  His request was approved and Orders 7-1 were issued by the VTARNG on 
14 May l984, reducing the applicant to pay grade E-4 effective 28 April l984.

He appears to have continued to serve in pay grade E-4 in the PAARNG because on 1 July l985 he enlisted in the PAARNG in pay grade E-4.  

He next had active duty in the Army Guard Reserve (AGR) program, as a member of the PAARNG from 2 July l985 through 30 November 1989, when he was honorably released from active duty for the purpose of retirement.  His pay grade remained as E-4.  

On 1 December l989, the applicant was placed on the retired list, in pay grade 
E-4.  He was credited with 20 years and 5 days active service and he had 
30 years, 5 months and 21 days for pay purposes.  He continues to receive retired pay in pay grade E-4.  

His records show no recorded indisciplines or lost time.  His awards and decorations include the Army Achievement Medal, the Good Conduct Medal (4th Award), the Army Reserve Component Achievement Medal (two awards), the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Armed Forces Reserve Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon, the Noncommissioned Officers Professional Development Ribbon, the Valorous Unit Award, the RVN Campaign Medal, the Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Palm (Unit Citation), the Vietnam Civil Actions Medal (Unit Award) and several marksmen badges.  

Title 10, United States Code, Section 3961(b) provides, in pertinent part, that unless entitled to a higher retired rank under some other provision of law, a Regular or Reserve of the Army, not covered by subsection (a) (pertaining to officer retirement ranks) who retires other than for physical disability retires in the regular or reserve grade that he holds on the date of his retirement.   

Title 10, United States Code, Section 3964 provides that warrant officers of the Army, enlisted members of the Regular Army, and reserve enlisted members that at the time of retirement are serving on active duty (or in the case of members of the National Guard on full-time National Guard duty), may be advanced on the retired list to the highest rank satisfactory held at the completion of 30 years active and retired service.  The service must be considered satisfactory by the Secretary of the Army.  

On 8 March 2000, the Army Grade Determination Review Board, acting for the Secretary of the Army, determined (COPY ATTACHED) that the highest rank the applicant satisfactorily held for the purpose of computation of retired pay was pay grade E-5, on the date that the applicant completed 30 years service as determined by the US Army Reserve Personnel Command (AR-PERSCOM).  

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:

1.  The evidence of record shows that the highest rank the applicant ever served on active duty was pay grade E-5 from April l969 until 30 November l976.  

2.  The applicant’s reduction from pay grade E-5 to pay grade E-4 in the VTARNG on 28 April l984 was voluntary for the purposes of entering a FTTD position in the PAARNG from April through September l984.  

3.  This was followed by an AGR tour of active duty in pay grade E-4 from July l985 through 30 November l989, the date he was retired from active duty with more than 20 years active service.  He was placed on the retired list in pay grade E-4 and this is in conformance with Federal statute (10 USC 3961).

4.  In accordance with 10 USC 3964, he is entitled for consideration for advancement to pay grade E-5 at the completion of 30 years active service and service on the retired list (late November l999).

5.  On 8 March 2000, the AGDRB found that the applicant’s service in pay grade E-5 had been satisfactory and directed that the applicant be advanced on the retired list to pay grade E-5 on the appropriate date for completion of 30 years active and retired list service as determined by the AR-PERSCOM.  

6.  This Board concludes that the applicant was not entitled to be placed on the retired list in pay grade E-5 on 1 December l989, since he had more than 20 but less than 30 years active service.  However, his advancement on the retired list as directed by the AGDRB is proper and should be executed by the 
AR PERSCOM and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service.

7.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

NOTE:  The Army Review Boards Agency Support Division-St. Louis is requested to forward the AGDRB action, with his military records, to the
AR PERSCOM for the appropriate action to advance the applicant on the retired list to pay grade E-5 at the appropriate date in November 1999.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__jlp   ___  __owt___  ___cjp___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999022967	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000316	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY WITH NOTE	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	129.04	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.