PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            13 July 2000 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000038532

	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	
	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		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 advancement on the Retired List to the rank and pay grade of first lieutenant (1LT/02).

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was serving in Vietnam when the rank of Sergeant Major was created and that he was unjustly denied the opportunity of making that rank before retiring.  However, he did serve for 3 years on active duty as a commissioned officer and should be advanced to the rank of 1LT on the Retired List.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted on 5 June 1946 for a period of 3 years and served until he was honorably discharged on 6 June 1949.

5.  On 18 May 1952 he was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the Officer Reserve Corps (now known as the USAR).  He was ordered to active duty on 1 February 1953, was promoted to the rank of 1LT on 3 August 1954 and served on active duty until 31 January 1956 when he was released from active duty and was transferred back to the USAR.  

6.  On 24 February 1956 he again enlisted in the Regular Army in the pay grade of E-6.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 10 February 1964 and to the pay grade of E-8 on 18 August 1966.

7.  On 31 October 1970 he was honorably released from active duty and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Retired) in the pay grade of E-8, effective 1 November 1970.  He had served 21 years, 5 months, and 15 days of total active service.

8.  Title 10, United States Code, provides, in pertinent part, that enlisted personnel may be advanced in grade to the highest grade satisfactorily held, as determined by the Secretary of the Army, upon completing 30 years of service.  This service may consist of combined active service and service in the USAR Control Group (Retired).  It further states, in effect, that a person entitled to retire shall have their retired pay computed on the monthly basic pay of the highest grade satisfactorily held at any time.  However, if entitled to retired pay computed under more than one pay formula or under any other provision of law, he is entitled to be paid under the applicable formula that is most favorable to him.

CONCLUSIONS:

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

2.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant did in fact serve on active duty as a commissioned officer for a period of 3 years and that the highest rank/pay grade he achieved while on active duty was that of a 1LT/02.  Accordingly, he should have been advanced on the Retired List to that rank and pay grade when he had 30 years of combined active service and service on the Retired List (1 June 1979).

3.  In view of the foregoing, 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 that the individual concerned was advanced on the Retired List to the rank and pay grade of 1LT/02, effective 1 June 1979, with his retired pay to be computed at the pay grade/rate that is most advantageous to the individual concerned, and that he be entitled to any back pay and allowances due as a result of this correction.

BOARD VOTE:  

__ja ____  ___mm__  __jlp ____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		____Jennifer L. Prater____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000038532	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/07/13	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  319	131.0900/ADV ON RET LIST	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.