MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            27 June 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000036467

	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. Mark D. Manning		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		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-8.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was in a position that forced him to retire because of personal hardship reasons and that he was promoted to the pay grade of E-8 on 1 May 1984 and served in that pay grade until his retirement on 31 May 1984, when he reverted back to the pay grade of E-7. 

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

On 12 March 1984 the applicant, while serving in the pay grade of E-7 at Fort Sheridan, Illinois, submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting that he be retired in the pay grade of E-7 effective 1 June 1984. His request was approved on 20 March 1984. 

On 30 March 1984 orders were published which promoted him to the pay grade of E-8 effective 1 May 1984.  The orders specified that the promotion was not valid if he was in a non-promotable status and that acceptance of the promotion would incur a 2-year service obligation prior to non-disability retirement.

There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant was ever promoted to the pay grade of E-8 or that he ever served in that grade.

He was honorably released from active duty on 31 May 1984 and was transferred to the Retired list in the pay grade of E-7 on 1 June 1984.  He had served 20 years, 1 month, and 3 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 completion 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 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 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 contain any evidence to show that he was ever promoted to a higher grade than he held at the time of Retirement.  Therefore, there is no basis to promote him to a higher grade or to advance him on the Retired list.

3.  Furthermore, the applicant was in a non-promotable status based on his approved retirement and there is no indication that he requested to withdraw his retirement in order to accept the promotion.

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

__wtm___  __mdm__  __clg ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000036467	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/06/27	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  319	131.0900/ADV TO HI GRD HELD ON RET LIST	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.