MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            2 March 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2000037971

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Edwin S. Castle		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Ms. Kathleen A. Newman 		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-7.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he should be advanced to the pay grade of E-7 on the Retired list, the highest grade he held.

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

The applicant served in both an inactive and active status in the Regular Army, the USAR, and the Texas Army National Guard (TXARNG) from 9 July 1957 until he was honorably released from active duty on 30 April 1989 and was placed on the Retired list in the pay grade of E-5 effective 1 May 1989.  He had served 20 years and 1 day of total active service.

A review of the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) shows that the highest grade the applicant attained was the pay grade of E-6 on 7 June 1969 and was reduced to the pay grade of E-3, while serving in a Regular Army status on 20 May 1975.  He attained the rank of E-5 on 1 August 1987 while serving in the TXARNG. 

At the time of his transfer to the Retired list, his DA Form 3713 (Data for Retired Pay) was prepared to indicate that the highest grade he attained was E-7; however, there is no evidence in his OMPF to support that entry.

The applicant’s case and records were reviewed by the Army Grade Determination Board on 25 February 2000 to determine the highest grade held by him while on active duty.  The Board determined that nonjudicial punishment had been imposed against the applicant on at least 16 occasions, that he was convicted by a special court-martial for AWOL, that the highest grade he had satisfactorily held was that of the pay grade of E-6, and that there was no evidence to support his claim that he had been promoted to the pay grade of E-7 or that he satisfactorily served in that grade. That board directed that he be advanced on the Retired list to the pay grade of  E-6. 

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 completion 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 selected for promotion or that he was ever promoted higher than the pay grade of E-6.  Therefore, there is no basis to promote him to a higher grade or to advance him on the Retired list to a grade higher than the grade of E-6, which has already been determined by the Army Grade Determination Board to be the highest grade he satisfactorily held.

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

___esc__  __kan____  ___sk___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000037971	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/03/01	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	N/A	
DISCHARGE REASON	N/A	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.129.0400	306/HI GRD HELD	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.