MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            19 September 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039250

	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. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. John P. Infante		Member	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		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, promotion to the pay grade of E-9.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he believes that he was unjustly denied promotion consideration to the pay grade of E-9 in 1981.  He goes on to state that he was told that anyone coming up on 27 years of service would not be chosen because the list may take more than a year to exhaust and therefore, he believes that his records were not considered.

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

He enlisted on 7 May 1952 and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-8 on 11 September 1978.

On 1 October 1981, he submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement (DA Form 2339) in which he requested retirement for length of service to be effective 1 January 1982.  He indicated at that time that the highest grade he had served in on active duty was the pay grade of E-8 and that he was being considered for promotion to the next higher grade.

On 31 December 1981 he was released from active duty and was transferred to the Retired List in the pay grade of E-8 effective 1 January 1982.  He had served 29 years, 7 months, and 24 days of total active service.

A review of the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) shows that his records were reviewed by the 1981 Calendar Year E-9 Promotion Selection Board.  However, there is no indication in his records which shows that he was selected for promotion.

Army Regulation 600-200, in effect at the time, provided the policies and procedures for enlisted promotions.  It states, in pertinent part, that selections by Department of the Army (DA) boards will be based on impartial consideration of all enlisted soldiers in the announced zone for promotion to the pay grades of E7 through E-9.  Soldiers who are not selected for promotion by DA boards will not be provided specific reasons for nonselection.  Selections are based on relative qualifications and the projected needs of the service.  Soldiers on a recommended list will be promoted on the last day of the month prior to being placed on the Retired List if their sequence number has not been reached and they will complete 30 years of active Federal service or have reached age 55.

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.  The applicant’s contention that he was not considered for promotion to the pay grade of E-9 in 1981 because of his years of service is not supported by the evidence of record.  His records show that he was in fact considered for promotion in 1981.  Additionally, the Board notes that had he been selected for promotion and was not promoted by the time he reached 30 years of service or age 55, he would have been promoted to the pay grade of E-9 on the day before being placed on the Retired List.

3.  While the Board understands the applicant’s desires to be promoted, it would be inappropriate for the Board to attempt to second guess the promotion selection boards that reviewed his records along with his peers and determined that he was not the best qualified among the group that was selected for promotion. 

4.  Accordingly, since there is no indication that he was unjustly denied consideration for promotion and since there is no evidence to suggest that he was in fact selected for promotion, there is no basis to do so at this 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

___rks___  __hof ___  __jpi____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039250	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/09/19	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  319	131.0900/ADV TO E9 ON RET LIST	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.