MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            31 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000037385

	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. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. Joe R. Schroeder		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:  That he was promoted to the pay grade of E-8 prior to being placed on the Retired List in the pay grade of E-7 and should be advanced to the pay grade of E-8 at this time.

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

He initially enlisted on 11 January 1965 and served until he was honorably discharged in the pay grade of E-6 on 19 January 1971.

He again enlisted on 26 July 1971 and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 24 August 1978. 

On 7 August 1984, he submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement (DA Form 2339) in which he requested retirement by reason of length of service to be effective 1 August 1985.  His request was approved on 17 August 1984.

On 7 March 1985, orders were published by the Department of the Army which announced the applicant’s promotion to the pay grade of E-8, effective 1 April 1985.  The orders specified that the promotion was not valid if the individual concerned was not in a promotable status on the effective date of promotion and that soldiers automatically incurred a 2-year service obligation prior to non-disability retirement. 

On 31 July 1985 he was released from active duty (REFRAD) and was transferred to the Retired List in the pay grade of E-7 effective 1 August 1985.

A review of the applicant’s records failed to show that he was ever promoted to the pay grade of E-8 or that he requested to have his approved retirement application withdrawn in order to accept the promotion.

Army Regulation 600-200 in effect at the time, provided the policies and procedures for enlisted promotions.  It states, in effect, that personnel who have an approved retirement application are in a non-promotable status and will be removed from promotion standing lists.

Title 10, United States Code, provides, in pertinent part, that enlisted personnel may be advanced in grade to the highest grade satisfactorily held 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).

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 clearly had an approved retirement prior to his promotions orders being published, which placed him in a non-promotable status and it appears that he elected to retire rather than to withdraw his application and served the 2-years service remaining obligation.  Accordingly, the Board finds that he did not satisfactorily serve in the pay grade of E-8 prior to being placed 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

___jrs___  ___sac __  __be____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000037385	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2000/08/31	
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.