MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 December 1998 DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-06530 AR19980002358 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. 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: That his records be corrected to show that at the time of his retirement he was advanced to the pay grade of E-5. APPLICANT STATES: That orders from his commanding officer recommended and qualified him for advancement prior to his retirement. The applicant submitted a copy of his reassignment orders which states that he was eligible and recommended for promotion. COUNSEL CONTENDS: Counsel was silent. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: On 27 June 1966, he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years. On 26 August 1966, 31 October 1966, and 10 July 1967, he was advanced to the pay grades of E-2, E-3, and E-4, respectively. On 6 June 1968, the applicant was injured by hostile forces while stationed in the Republic of Vietnam. This injury resulted in the amputation of his right leg. On 22 February 1969, the applicant was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL), after being found unfit for duty. He with given a disability rating of 60 percent. His Report of Separation indicates he had 2 years, 7 months and 25 days of creditable service. On 31 May 1972, he was removed from TDRL, and permanently retired with an effective date of 1 June 1972, in the pay grade of E-4. Title 10, United States Code, section 1201, provides for the physical disability retirement of a member who has at least 20 years of service or a disability rating of at least 30 percent. In the processing of this case an advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) was obtained from the Commander, U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Center, Pay Certification Section, which recommended that the applicant’s request be denied, stating that the applicant’s military personnel records does not indicate that he was ever promoted to a grade higher that specialist four. Army Regulation 600-200, Chapter 7, then in effect, prescribes policy and procedures for promotion of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 7-4 states that promotion of enlisted personnel to grades E-3 through E-9 will be announced in routine orders. It further states that field grade commanders of any organization authorized a commander in the grade of lieutenant colonel or higher could promote assigned personnel to pay grades E-5 and E-6, who equaled or exceeded an announced Department of the Army (DA) promotion point cut-off score. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded: 1. In order to justify the correction of military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. 2. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement. 3. There is no evidence in the available records to substantiate the applicant’s claim that he was promoted to pay grade E-5 prior to his retirement. 4. The Board notes that the applicant submitted a copy of his reassignment orders dated 20 June 1968, with blocks 5a and 5b checked, indicating he was qualified and recommended for promotion, however, there is no documentation in the applicant’s records to indicate that he was on an approved recommended list, or that he met or exceeded a promotion points cut-off score announced by DA. 5. 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. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ __vbc___ GRANT ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___gdp__ __svw___ ________ DENY APPLICATION Loren G. Harrell Director