IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 February 2022 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20210009882 APPLICANT REQUESTS: reinstatement of his previous rank and higher pay. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Email response to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) question FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three-year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code, section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states he was demoted to sergeant (SGT)/E-5 as a result of depression. He thinks they call it PTSD. He accepts his responsibility for his actions in full. He thinks he has paid for his mistake. He was informed that at the age of 62, he could have his pay/rank and allowances reinstated. 3. Review of the applicant's service records shows; a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 September 1975 for 4 years. He held military occupational specialty 19D (cavalry Scout). He was honorably released from active duty on 19 September 1979. b. He again enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 May 1980. He served through a serious of reenlistments or extensions. He was promoted to sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 on 19 June 1986. c. During April 1993, he received a Relief For Cause NCO Evaluation Report covering the rating period October 1992 through March 1993. His rater him as a "No" in 3 out of 7 Army Values, his performance "Needs Improvement' in Competence and Leadership, and his Overall Potential Marginal. His senior rater rated his Overall Performance and Potential as "Fair." d. On 26 May 1993, the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (then knows as U.S. Total Personnel Command) published Orders Number 86-8 promoting him to master sergeant (MSG)/E-8 effective 1 July 1993. e. On 13 January 1994, by memorandum, the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (then knows as U.S. Total Personnel Command) administratively removed him from the promotion list. A Department of the Army Enlisted Standby Advisory Board that adjourned on 19 November 1993, recommended his removal from the recommended list to MSG. The Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel approved the recommendation of the board on 29 December 1993. (1) His name has been removed from the recommended list announced in Memorandum, this Headquarters, dated 23 Jul 92, subject: Promotion List to MSG. This removal action does not preclude his consideration by future selection boards. (2) Request a commander in the grade of LTC or above in his chain of command be advised of this action so that proper notification to the Soldier can be effected. f. During March 1995, the applicant received a referred NCO Evaluation Report covering the rating period March 1994 to February 1995. His rater rated him as a "No" in 1 out of 7 Army Values, his performance "Needs Improvement' in Responsibility and Accountability," and his Overall Potential Marginal. His senior rater rated his Overall Performance and Potential as "Fair" with the comment "Command referred to Army Drug and Alcohol Prevention and Control Program for alcohol abuse rehabilitation; subsequently failed to progress." g. The facts and circumstances surrounding his reduction from SFC/E-7 to staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 are not available for review. His NCO Evaluation Report for the period March 1995 through May 1995 shows his rank as SSG/E-6 and his date of rank as 23 February 1995. h. On 23 May 1995, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 for misconduct, on divers occasions between 28 March 1995 and 24 April 1995, wrong­ fully appropriate government services by placing and accepting on a government telephone long distance personal telephone calls. His punishment consisted of reduction from SSG/E-6 to sergeant (SGT)/E-5. i. There is no evidence in his records and he provides none to show he was promoted back to SSG/E-6 after his reduction to SGT/E-5. j. On 16 June 1995, Headquarters, U.S. Army Armor Center and Fort Knox published Orders 167-00254 retiring him from active duty in the rank of SGT/E-5 effective 30 June 1995. k. He retired from active duty on 30 June 1995. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). It also shows in * Block 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank) SGT and Block 5b (Pay Grade) E-5 * Block 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade) 23 May 1995 4. On 11 June 2021, a staff member of the Case Management Division corresponded with the applicant and asked him to submit medical documents that support his mental health condition of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). 5. The applicant responded by email on 28 July 2021 and stated "I did not get diagnosed with PTSD. After I came back from Saudi in 1990 I was depressed. So, I diagnosed myself with it. I'm sorry. I misinformed you. It was never my intention to misinform you. I hope this doesn't totally screw things up." 6. The DOD FMR, volume 7B (Military Pay Policy and Procedures-Retired Pay), chapter 1 (Initial Entitlements- Retirements), section 0105 (Rank and Pay Grade), states that unless entitled to a higher grade under some other provision of law, those Regular and Reserve members who retire other than for disability, will retire in the Regular or Reserve grade they hold on the date of retirement. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application, all supporting documents and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The applicant’s contentions, military record and regulatory guidance were carefully considered. Documentation available for review is void evidence that the applicant had a medical condition that led to his misconduct and he did not provide such documentation on his own behalf. Based on the preponderance of evidence available for review, the Board determined the evidence presented insufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF :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 the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 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. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, United States Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation, volume 7B (Military Pay Policy and Procedures-Retired Pay), chapter 1 (Initial Entitlements- Retirements), section 0105 (Rank and Pay Grade), paragraph 010501A (General Determinations) states that unless entitled to a higher grade under some other provision of law, those Regular and Reserve members who retire other than for disability, will retire in the Regular or Reserve grade they hold on the date of retirement. Paragraph 10503 (Satisfactory Service) provides that the determination as to what constitutes satisfactory service for the purpose of retirement in the highest grade is within the discretionary power of the Secretary of the Military Department concerned. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20210009882 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1