MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            12 September 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000038873

	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. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Fred Eichorn		Member	
	Ms. Carol Jo Suiter		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 recommended for promotion to the pay grade of E-7 in May 1969 and was transferred to another battalion in Germany in June 1969 that had vacancies for promotion; however, he was never notified or included in the selection process because he was of Puerto Rican descent.  He goes on to state that he was eventually promoted in March 1974 but that the delay in his promotion hindered his promotion to the pay grade of E-8.  He further states that he had an exemplary record of service and should have been promoted to the pay grade of E-8 had the injustice not occurred.

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

He was inducted in Puerto Rico on 8 August 1958 and served until he was honorably released from active duty on 7 July 1960.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 September 1960 for a period of 3 years and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 13 June 1966 and to the pay grade of E-7 on 22 February 1974.  His records also indicate that as early as 19 March 1975 his records were forwarded for review by Department of the Army selection boards.

On 8 August 1978, he submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement (DA Form 2339) in which he requested retirement for length of service to be effective 1 February 1979, in lieu of accepting a permanent change of station (PCS) assignment.

On 31 January 1979, he was REFRAD and was transferred to the Retired List in the pay grade of E-7, effective 1 February 1979.  He had served 20 years, 3 months and 2 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 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.

3.  The applicant’s contention that he was unjustly denied promotion to the pay grade of E-8 based on his ethnic background has been noted by the Board; however, his contention is not supported by either the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record.  Unfortunately, given the passage of time and the unavailability of records, it is not possible to determine with any degree of certainty why the applicant was not promoted sooner. 

4.  In any event, there appears to be no basis for the Board to attempt to second guess the selection boards that reviewed his records along with those of his peers and failed to select him for promotion at the time. 

5.  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

___cs___  ___fe ___  ___cmf __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000038873	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/09/12	
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.