MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            29 June 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000036963

	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:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. John N. Slone		Member	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		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 selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-8 and his command would not publish the orders promoting him because he had previously initiated a request for retirement.  He further states that he earned the promotion during an earlier tour in Vietnam and should have been promoted.  In support of his application he submits a copy of a letter from the Department of the Army (DA) dated 16 January 1970 indicating that he had been selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-8.

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

On 18 September 1969, while serving in the pay grade of E-7 in Vietnam, the applicant submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting that he be retired for length of service effective 1 September 1970.

On 16 January 1970, DA notified the applicant in writing, through his chain of command, that he had been selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-8 by a Standby Enlisted Advisory Board that adjourned on 15 December 1969.  The letter also informed him that his promotion was effective 13 January 1970.

On 10 February 1970, the applicant submitted a request to decline the promotion to the pay grade of E-8 and to be allowed to retire on 1 September 1970.  He cited as the basis for his request the fact that his family had been relocated to Hawaii in contemplation of his retirement and that acceptance and subsequent assignment to another area other than Hawaii would impose an undue hardship on him and his family.  The applicant’s request was approved and his promotion orders were revoked on 24 February 1970.

On 31 August 1970 he was honorably released from active duty in the pay grade of E-7 and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Retired) effective 1 September 1970.  He had served 20 years, 1 month, and 17 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 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 properly advanced to and satisfactorily served in a higher grade prior to his being placed on the Retired list.  The applicant clearly declined acceptance of his promotion to the pay grade of E-8 and the 2-year service remaining obligation that the promotion incurred.  He did so within 30 days of the date the promotion orders were published and therefore did not satisfactorily serve in the pay grade of E-8 prior to being placed on the Retired List in accordance with applicable laws and regulations in effect at the time.

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

___mm__  __jhl  ___  ___js____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000036963	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/06/29	
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.