MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            20 July 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000037968

	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. Ann M. Campbell		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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 pay grade of E-7.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his orders were published promoting him to the pay grade of E-7 while he was serving his second tour of duty in Vietnam and the Command Sergeant Major (CSM) tore the promotion orders up because he (the applicant) refused to cook for the CSM and his General.  He further states that he told the CSM that he only cooked for the troops in the field and although he always worked in an E-7 position, he was never officially promoted to that pay grade.  He goes on to state that his commander went to bat for him and almost got in trouble for intervening in his behalf.

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

After serving on active duty in both the Navy and Marine Corps, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 February 1963 in the pay grade of E-2.  He was initially assigned for duty as a cook in Korea.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 14 October 1965 and served a tour in Vietnam from July 1966 to July 1977.  Upon completion of his tour in Vietnam he was transferred to Oakland Army Base, California where he was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 25 November 1968. 

On 12 January 1969 he was transferred back to Vietnam and served there for a year as a first cook with both the 59th Field Service Company and the 1st Air Cavalry Division.

A review of the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) shows that the applicant was considered by several Department of the Army promotion selection boards for promotion to the pay grade of E-7; however, there is no evidence that he was ever selected for promotion by any of those boards.  Additionally, there is no evidence in the available records to show that orders were ever published which promoted him to the pay grade of E-7.

The applicant’s records show that on 3 February 1976 he submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement (DA Form 2339) and indicated at that time that the highest pay grade he had attained was that of E-6.

On 31 July 1976 he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Retired) in the pay grade of E-6 effective 1 August 1976.  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, 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 has not submitted evidence with his application, and the evidence of record does not contain any evidence to show that he was properly 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

__klw ___  ___sac __  __amc __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000037968	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/07/20	
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.