MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 
	BOARD DATE:            28 September 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039566

	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. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest M. Willcher		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr.		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 served as a unit First Sergeant in Vietnam for a 6-month period in 1970 and that he was promoted to the pay grade of E-8 on 1 April 1981.  However, because he had an approved retirement for 30 June 1981, he had to decline the promotion.  He goes on to state that he subsequently discovered that he could have requested to withdraw his retirement application in order to accept the promotion but was never informed of such.  He also goes on to state that he believes that when the Army centralized promotions at the grades of E-7 through E-9, they created an injustice to the system because they were too far removed from the soldiers in the field and had to rely solely on records.  As a result, he had 11 years in grade before he was selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-8, yet he reached the pay grade of E-7 in less than 10 years.

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

He enlisted on 23 January 1964 and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 10 January 1970.

On 26 November 1980, while stationed in Korea, he submitted a request to retire for length of service effective 1 July 1981.  His request was approved on 23 December 1980.

On 2 March 1981, orders were published which announced the applicant’s promotion to the pay grade of E-8 effective 1 April 1981.  There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant was ever officially promoted; however, his Senior Enlisted Evaluation Report (SEER) for the period ending in May 1981 indicates that the applicant was selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-8, however he declined it because of the retirement plan he had formulated.  The applicant signed the SEER on 4 May 1981.

On 30 June 1981 he was released from active duty (REFRAD) and was transferred to the Retired List in the pay grade of E-7, effective 1 July 1981.  He had served 20 years and 27 days of total active service.

Title 10, United States Code, Section 3964, 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 had an approved retirement before the effective date of his promotion; therefore, he was in a nonpromotable status and thus could not accept the promotion.  Accordingly, he was not promoted to the pay grade of E-8 nor did he satisfactorily serve in that grade.  Inasmuch as advancement on the Retired List requires satisfactory service in a higher grade, the Board finds that he was properly retired in the pay grade of E-7 and that there is no basis to advance him to the pay grade of E-8. 

3.  While the Board cannot determine the validity of the applicant’s contention that he was unaware that he could request to withdraw his application for retirement, his records tend to indicate that he had already made up his mind to retire and elected to decline the promotion rather than serve the 2-year service remaining obligation associated with the promotion. 

4.  The applicant’s contention that the centralized promotion system serves an injustice to the promotion of enlisted personnel is not supported by either the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record.  While the Board will concede that no system is perfect, the centralized promotion system has served the Department well over the years and provides an impartial selection of the best-qualified soldiers necessary to meet the needs of an ever changing force.

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

___emw _  __rvo___  ___dh___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039566	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2000/09/28	
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.