MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            8 June 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000037667

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Chairperson	
	Ms. Lana E. McGlynn		Member	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		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:  In effect, that he be advanced on the retired list to the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class/E-7 (SFC/E-7).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was never informed of his promotion status and he was never given the opportunity to prepare his records for presentation to an SFC promotion selection board.  He claims that his first sergeant at the time was not impressed with soldiers who had served in Vietnam and did not assist in his being considered and processed for promotion consideration.  He indicates that he was so close to retirement that he did not wish to pursue this issue but believes that he should be advanced on the retired list based on his record of service.  

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

On 31 August 1988, he retired from the Regular Army after completing 20 years, 1 month, and 26 days of active military service.  At the time of his retirement the applicant held the rank and pay grade of staff sergeant/E-6 (SSG/E-6) and served in military occupational specialty 13B (Cannon Crewmember). 

The applicant’s Department of the Army (DA) Form 2-1 (Enlisted Qualification Record) indicates in block 18 (appointments and reductions) that the applicant attained the rank of SSG/E-6 on 17 May 1977.  There is no indication in the record that he ever held a higher rank and pay grade while serving on active duty or that he was ever denied promotion consideration to SFC/E-7.

On 31 August 1988, the applicant was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD).  The record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 
(Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty), which was signed by the applicant.  This document shows that he was separated, under the provisions of chapter 12, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of length of service retirement. In addition, at the time of his REFRAD he held the rank of SSG/E-6 and had completed a total of 20 years, 1 month, and 26 days of active military service.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 12 sets policies and procedures for voluntary retirement of soldiers because of length of service.  Paragraph 12-3b states, in pertinent part, that retirement will be in the regular or reserve grade the soldier holds on the date of retirement as directed in Title 10 of the United States Code, section 3961 (10 USC 3961).  

Paragraph 12-6 (Advancement on the Retired List) of the regulation contains guidance on the advancement of soldiers on the Retired List.  It indicates that advancement on the Retired List is limited to retired soldiers who held a higher grade and successfully served in that higher grade while on active duty.  There are no provisions for advancement of individuals who held a different rank title if they were retired in the appropriate pay grade.  

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.  The Board noted the applicant’s contention that he was denied promotion consideration to the rank of SFC/E-7.  However, this claim is not supported by the evidence or record.  The record shows that the applicant was never selected for promotion to SFC/E-7 and that he never served above the pay grade of E-6 while on active duty.  

2.  By law and regulation, advancement of soldiers on the Retired List is only authorized when a member has satisfactorily served on active duty in a higher pay grade.  The Board concluded that since the applicant never served in pay grade E-7, advancement to that grade on the Retired List is not appropriate. 

3.  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.

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

___slp___  __ao____  ___lm___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000037667	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/06/08	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1988/08/31	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C12	
DISCHARGE REASON	Retirement	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  310	131.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.