MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           15 August 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039236

	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	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Thomas D. Howard, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Member	
	Ms. Gail J. Wire		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 to Chief Warrant Officer Four (CW4), W-4 on the retired list.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he had been promoted to CW4 but had to retire as a Chief Warrant Officer Three (CW3), W-3 because he did not serve the mandatory two years in grade.

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

After having had prior enlisted service, he was appointed a warrant officer one and entered active duty on 18 October 1972.  He was promoted to CW3 on         8 June 1979.

On 20 August 1985, the applicant applied for retirement.  On 17 October 1985, the U. S. Army Military Personnel Center (USAMILPERCEN) approved his retirement.

USAMILPERCEN Orders 124-76 dated 3 November 1985 promoted the applicant to CW4 effective 1 December 1985.  The orders stated “Promotion is not valid and will be revoked if the officer concerned is not in a promotable status on the effective date of promotion.”

DA Form 664, Service Member’s Statement Concerning Compensation, dated  22 April 1986; DD Form 1407, Dependent Medical Care Statement, dated         22 April 1986; and DD Form 137, Installation Clearance Record, undated but showing he was to depart 29 April 1986 all show the applicant’s rank as CW3. 

The applicant retired on 1 July 1986 in the rank and grade of CW3, W3.

Army Regulation 624-100, in effect at the time, prescribed the policies and procedures for the promotion of commissioned and warrant officers.  Paragraph 1-9 stated that an officer’s promotion was automatically delayed, therefore, an officer was not promoted (in spite of the publication of promotion orders) when a number of conditions applied, including when his or her voluntary retirement application had been approved by MILPERCEN.

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.  The law requires a warrant officer to have served on active duty in the higher grade before advancement on the retired list to that grade is authorized.  Although orders were issued promoting the applicant to CW4, that promotion was invalid because he was not in a promotable status on the effective date of the promotion.  He was not in a promotable status because his retirement had already been approved.  

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

__tdh___  __aao___  __gjw___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039236	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000815	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	129.04	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.