MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            20 July 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000036448

	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. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Ms. Ann M. Campbell		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:  Advancement on the Retired List to the pay grade of E-7.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the highest grade he held was the pay grade of E-7 and that he was unjustly reduced from that pay grade before he was eligible for retirement.  However, he now has 30 years of service and should be advanced back to that pay grade on the Retired List.

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

The applicant was initially inducted on 20 February 1943 and served until he was honorably released from active duty on 4 April 1946.  He then enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 June 1948 and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 29 September 1953 and to the pay grade of E-7 on 3 March 1961.  However, on 12 May 1961, he was reduced to the pay grade of E-6 by reason of misconduct.

On 17 May 1965 he submitted an Application for Retirement (DA Form 2339) in which he requested retirement by reason of length of service to be effective 31 October 1965.  His request was subsequently approved for release from active duty (REFRAD) effective 30 November 1965 in the pay grade of E-6. 

Accordingly, he was honorably REFRAD on 30 November 1965 and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Retired) in the pay grade of E-6, effective 1 December 1965.  He had served 20 years, 6 months, and 29 days 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, as determined by the Secretary of the Army, upon completing 30 years of service.  This service may consist of combined active service and service in the USAR Control Group (Retired).

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 this requirement.

2.  In order to be advanced to a higher grade on the Retired List, the applicant must have at some time been properly advanced to and satisfactorily served in a higher grade prior to his being placed on the Retired List.  The applicant has not submitted evidence with his application, and the evidence of record does not support the contention that he satisfactorily held the pay grade of E-7. 

3.  Furthermore, given the fact that he was reduced from the pay grade of E-7 to the pay grade of E-6 for misconduct, approximately 2 months after attaining that pay grade, the Board finds that he did not satisfactorily serve in the pay grade of E-7.  Accordingly, there is no basis to advance him to that pay grade on the Retired List. 

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

__klw ___  ___sac __  ___amc _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000036448	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/07/20	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  319	131.0900/adv on ret list	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.