MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            4 November 1998 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-01224

	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.	Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr.	Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr.	James E. Vick		Chairperson	
	Mr.	Luther L. Santiful		Member	
	Mr.	Thomas N. Kuhn		Member	

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

	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 effect, that he be given a terminal leave promotion to the rank of captain that would have resulted in his being promoted to the ranks of major and lieutenant colonel (LTC) sooner, and eventually would have resulted in his attaining the rank of colonel. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that at the time he was discharged at the end of World War II, there was much turmoil and confusion and administrative matters were not being conducted in a timely manner.  He further states that he himself was faced with an increased workload and as such dismissed the fact the he had not been promoted to the rank of captain.  He continues by stating that his main concern was getting back to the States and starting his life over again.  He contends that had he been promoted to the rank of captain at the time he was being separated, he would eventually have attained the rank of colonel, instead of retiring as a LTC. 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant was inducted on 12 April 1941 and served in an enlisted status until he graduated from the field artillery OCS on 11 March 1943 and was commissioned as a second lieutenant.

He was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant (1LT) on 24 May 1944 while serving in the European Theater of Operations (ETO).  He remained in the ETO until he was returned to Fort Meade, Maryland and was honorably released from active duty on 13 January 1946 in the rank of 1LT and was transferred to the USAR.

He remained in the USAR, branch transferred to the Signal Corps, and was promoted to the rank of captain on 6 January 1955.   He eventually attained the rank of LTC 29 September 1968.

On 11 February 1969, he was issued a Notification of Eligibility for Retired Pay (20-year letter) at Age 60 (9 July 1978).

On 8 March 1971 he was notified by the Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN) that he had attained the maximum amount of service allowed and that it was mandatory that he be removed from the active Reserve no later than 9 April 1971.

The applicant elected to be transferred to the Retired Reserve and as such was transferred to the Retired Reserve in the rank of LTC on 14 May 1971.

On 30 September 1997, in response to a congressional inquiry regarding the applicant’s contention that he should have been promoted to captain at an earlier date, officials at the Total Army Personnel Command (formerly known as ARPERCEN) reviewed the applicant’s records and determined that the applicant was not eligible for a terminal leave promotion under the criteria established at the time by War Department Circular 140.  The officials opined that while he met the time in grade requirement for a one-grade promotion, he did not meet the efficiency index of 40, which was required by the applicable guidance in effect at the time.

A review of his records shows that he was given an adjusted efficiency index of 38.6.

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.  In order to justify correction of a 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.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The evidence of record shows that applicant was released from active duty in the rank of 1LT based on the applicable guidelines in effect at the time.  

3.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board.  However, they are not supported by the evidence submitted with his application nor the evidence of record. 

4.  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:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__tnk ___  ___ls ___  __jev  ___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director