MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            8 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000036910

	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. Stanley Kelley		Chairperson	
	Mr. James  E. Anderholm		Member	
	Mr. Ronald E. Blakely		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 on the Retired list to the pay grade of E-8.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was informed by personnel officials that he would probably be coming down on orders for an overseas assignment to Germany if he did not submit his retirement.  When he asked if he could wait until the promotion list was released he was informed that he could not and that he would have 11 months left after submitting his application at that time.  Inasmuch as he had already been passed over twice for promotion he thought he would not be promoted and submitted his application for retirement.  However, on 2 June 1983 he was informed that he had been selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-8, but that he could not accept the promotion because he already had retirement orders.  He goes on to state that he inquired as to whether he could withdraw his retirement application and accept an assignment anywhere the Army wanted to send him.  He was informed that the Department would not accept that offer and thus he retired on 1 December 1983 in the pay grade of    E-7.

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

He enlisted on 18 November 1963 and remained on active duty as a light weapons infantryman through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 21 August 1976.

On 29 October 1982, while serving at Fort Polk, Louisiana, the applicant submitted a request for voluntary retirement to be effective 30 November 1983. 

Meanwhile, the applicant was selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-8 effective 2 June 1983.  However, there is no indication in the available records to show that he was ever actually promoted or that he requested to withdraw his retirement application to accept the promotion.

On 30 November 1983 he was honorably released from active duty and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Retired) in the pay grade of E-7 effective 1 December 1983.  He had served 20 years and 13 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 completion of 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.  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

___sk ___  __ja ____  ___reb __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000036910	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/08/08	
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.