MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           17 May 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000035885

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Fred Eichorn		Member	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Member	

	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 he be advanced to Sergeant First Class (SFC), E-7 on the retired list.

APPLICANT STATES:  That during his tour he was assigned to a higher level than his pay grade.  He was not able to attend the necessary military school for advancement before he attained 20 years of service and was forced to retire.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 January 1967.  He was promoted to Staff Sergeant (SSG), E-6 on 13 January 1978.  His DA Form 2-1, Personnel Qualification Record, shows he had performed duties in military occupational specialty (MOS) 31V30 Tactical Communications Chief in his last assignment at Fort Polk, LA from February 1985 (and for several assignments prior to that time) until his retirement.  He retired on 1 March 1987 in the rank and grade of SSG,  E-6.

Army Regulation 611-201 provides the enlisted military occupational specialty classification structure for the U. S. Army.  In pertinent part it states that the fourth character of the MOS code shows the skill and grade level in the MOS.  Skill level 3 identifies a position authorized a Staff Sergeant, E-6.

Title 10, U. S. Code, chapter 369 governs retired grades.  Section 3964 provides that warrant officers and enlisted members may, when their active service plus their service on the retired list totals 30 years, be advanced on the retired list to the highest grade in which they served on active duty satisfactorily.

Army Regulation 15-80 establishes policies, procedures and responsibilities of the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB).  Paragraph 1.8 states that the AGDRB will consider each case on its own merits and is allowed substantial discretion in reaching its decision.  Determination will be based on the soldier’s overall service in the grade in question, either on active duty or other service qualifying the soldier for service or physical disability retirement, receipt of retired pay or separation for physical disability.  Pertinent circumstances include the length of time in grade and the performance level.

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.  The evidence of record does not confirm the applicant’s contention that he was assigned to a higher level than his pay grade.  In addition, advancement on the retired list can only be considered when a soldier served in a higher grade that would have qualified him for retirement, receipt of retired pay, or separation for physical disability.  Since the applicant was never promoted to Sergeant First Class, E-7, he was never qualified for retirement as an E-7.  Therefore, it is not appropriate to consider him for advancement on the retired list to that grade.

2.  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

__cmf___  ___fe___  __rjw___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000035885	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000517	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	129.04	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.