MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            24 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000036475

	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. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub		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 she be advanced on the Retired List to the pay grade of E-8.

APPLICANT STATES:  That she served on active duty satisfactorily in the pay grade of E-8 but was retired in the pay grade of E-7 because she did not meet the 2-year service remaining requirement in that pay grade.

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

She enlisted on 13 June 1966 and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.  She was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 30 May 1977.

On 1 October 1985 she submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting retirement for length of service to be effective 1 October 1986.  She indicated at that time that the highest pay grade served on active duty was that of an E-7.  She was granted a 1-month waiver of her permanent change of station obligation by the Department of the Army (DA) and her request was approved.

On 28 October 1985 orders were published by the DA announcing the applicant’s promotion to the pay grade of E-8 effective 1 December 1985.  The orders specified that the promotion was not valid if the applicant was not in a promotable status on the effective date of promotion and that acceptance of the promotion automatically incurred a 2-year service remaining obligation prior to non-disability retirement.  The orders were revoked on 16 December 1985.

Her records show that she was paid in the pay grade of E-8 in December 1985 and that the pay was recouped in January 1986.

On 31 August 1986 she was released from active duty and was transferred to the Retired List in the pay grade of E-7 effective 1 September 1986.  She had served 20 years, 2 months and 18 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 while on active duty, 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).

Army Regulation 600-200 serves as the authority for enlisted promotions.  It states, in pertinent part, that personnel who have an approved retirement are considered to be in a non-promotable status.

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 her being placed on the Retired List.  The applicant has not submitted evidence with her application, and the evidence of record does not contain any evidence to show that she was properly promoted to a higher grade than she held at the time of retirement.  In fact, there is evidence to suggest that she declined the promotion in order to retire.

3.  Inasmuch as the applicant was in a nonpromotable status due to her having an approved retirement prior to the effective date of her promotion and since there is no evidence in the available records to show that she was granted a waiver of the 2-year service remaining obligation associated with acceptance of the promotion, there is no basis to advance her 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

__cg____  __alr____  ___clg___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000036475	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/08/24	
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.