MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           6 July 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039255

	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. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest M. Willcher		Member	
	Mr. John P. Infante		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 she be advanced to Master Sergeant (MSG),    E-8 on the retired list.

APPLICANT STATES:  That she received notification of selection to MSG while assigned to Headquarters, U. S. Army Recruiting Command (USAREC), Fort Sheridan, IL.  Almost immediately, preparations were made to transfer her to an E-8 position.  She was transferred to duty station Lafayette, IN.  After being on the E-8 list for over a year and enduring the financial burdens, inconvenience, and transfer it imposed on her, she decided to retire.  She thought about leaving recruiting but was told that if she took the promotion she would probably go overseas even if she could get out of recruiting.  She always tried to do her very best but after 12 years in recruiting she suffered financially, physically or mentally.  She requests advancement on the retired list as she would have received the promotion had she extended for another 2 years.

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

After having had prior service, she reenlisted in the Regular Army on 2 March 1967.  She was awarded military occupational specialty 00E, Recruiter, on        11 May 1970.  She was promoted to Sergeant First Class (SFC), E-7 on 26 May 1976.

On 19 February 1981, the applicant was congratulated by USAREC on having been recently selected for promotion to E-8.

On 8 December 1981, the applicant applied for retirement. 

Orders 2-1, U. S. Army Military Personnel Center, dated 4 January 1982, promoted the applicant to MSG effective 1 February 1982.

On 21 January 1982, the applicant’s request for retirement was approved.  

On 1 April 1982, the applicant retired, in the rank and grade of SFC, E-7.

Army Regulation 600-200, in effect at the time, prescribed policies and procedures for the management of enlisted personnel, to include promotions and reductions in grade.  Paragraph 7-6 stated that soldiers are nonpromotable and will not be advanced or promoted to a higher grade under a number of conditions including when their voluntary retirement application had been approved.

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 Board appreciates the applicant’s dedicated service and acknowledges the sacrifices and hardships she must have endured while serving so long as a recruiter.  However, the law requires an enlisted soldier 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 MSG, that promotion was invalid because she was not in a promotable status on the effective date of the promotion.  She was not in a promotable status because her 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

__cmf___  __emw___  __jpi___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039255	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000706	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	129.04	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.