PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            1 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999029103

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Gale J. Thomas		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs		Chairperson	
	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		Member	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		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 that his records be corrected to show he retired as a Master Sergeant/E-7, instead of Specialist/E-7.

3.  The applicant states that there were no noncommissioned ranks authorized in the attaché system during his tour, and he was automatically converted from Master Sergeant/E-7 to Specialist/E-7.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was promoted to the grade of   E-7 on 29 September 1952 and served as a Master Sergeant/E-7 between December 1954 and November 1963 when his grade reverted to Specialist/E-7, while he performed duties as an attaché specialist.  

5.  The applicant was retired by reason of length of service on 30 November 1966.  His retirement grade was recorded as Specialist/E-7.  

6.  Army Regulation 635-200 currently allows noncommissioned officers in the grade of Master Sergeant/E-8, who were former First Sergeants, to be placed on the retired list in the more prestigious grade title of “first sergeants.”  The grade of Specialist/E-7 is no longer in the Army’s inventory and the grade title Master Sergeant is now associated with pay grade E-8.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board recognizes that the titles of grades have changed over the years.  

2.  In this particular case the applicant served successfully in the grade of Master Sergeant/E-7 and Specialist/E-7, but prefers to be retired in the grade Master Sergeant/E-7, which is the more prestigious title.

3.  Army regulations currently provide for individuals who served in the grade of First Sergeant/E-8 and Master Sergeant/E-8, to be retired in the more prestigious grade of First Sergeant.  The Board contends that there is no reason not to apply this standard to individuals who served in similar situations where a noncommissioned title and a specialist title were utilized for the same pay grade.

4.  As such the Board concludes it would be in the interest of justice to allow the applicant’s retired grade to be changed from Specialist/E-7 to Master Sergeant/E-7.  However, because the “Master Sergeant” title is now associated with individuals in pay grade E-8 his record should clearly show that he was a Master Sergeant/E-7 rather than merely changing his grade title in order to alleviate any confusion.

5.  In view of the foregoing, and in the interest of justice, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing the applicant’s retired grade as Master Sergeant/E-7.

BOARD VOTE:  

___kak __  __dj ____  ___ewl __  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		_____D. S. Jacobs______
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999029103	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/08/01	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  338	136.0000/retired	
2.  307	129.0500/pay grade	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.