MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            25 May 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000035976

	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	
	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr. 		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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:  In effect, that he be advanced on the Retired list to the pay grade of E-8.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was promoted to the pay grade of E-8 in March 1974 and later applied for retirement before having completed 1 year in grade.  He further states that he was unjustly forced to retire in the pay grade of E-7 on 30 August 1974 because he did not serve the promotion lock-in.

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

On 1 May 1973 orders were published by the Department of the Army promoting the applicant to the pay grade of E-8 with a date of rank of 10 April 1973.  The orders indicated that the promotion automatically incurred a 2-year service obligation prior to nondisability retirement.

The orders were received at the applicant’s duty station in Cincinnati, Ohio (Recruiting Main Station) on 14 May 1973 and the applicant submitted a declination of the promotion to his commander on the same day.

On 15 May 1974 the applicant submitted a voluntary request for retirement due to length of service to be effective 1 September 1974.  His request was approved on 25 June 1974.  A review of his retirement application (DA Form 2339) shows that he indicated that the highest grade he attained while on active duty was the pay grade of E-7.

Accordingly, he was honorably released from active duty on 31 August 1974 and was placed on the Retired list in the pay grade of E-7 effective 1 September 1974 due to length of service.  He had served 20 years of total active service.

Title 10, United States Code, provides, in pertinent part, that enlisted personnel may be advanced in grade to the highest grade satisfactorily held while on active duty, as determined by the Secretary of the Army, upon completion 30 years of service.  This service may consist of combined active service and service in the USAR Control Group (Retired) and the Army Grade Determination Board is the agency that reviews the records and/or applications for advancement on the Retired list in behalf of the Secretary, for those who have attained 30 years of service.

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 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.  In order to be advanced to a higher grade on the Retired list, the applicant must have at some time been advanced to and served in a higher grade prior to his being placed on the Retired list and must have a combined total of 30 years of service (active and/or service on the Retired list).  The applicant did not accept his promotion to the pay grade of E-8 nor did he serve on active duty in that pay grade.  Therefore, the Board finds that there is no basis for him to be advanced on the Retired list.  

3.  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

___ewl __  __klw ___  __eja ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000035976	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/05/25	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  306	129.0400/ADV ON RET LIST	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.