MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            16 November 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000041674

	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. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Ms. Martha E. Schuler		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, that he be promoted to the pay grade of E-8 and advanced on the Retired List in that pay grade.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was recommended for promotion to the pay grade of E-8 between 1966 and 1979 and was never selected.  He goes on to state that in 26 ½  years of active service he was promoted only once and that he had high levels of assignments and a clean record as a professional noncommissioned officer.  He further states that he is now a service-connected veteran and it would raise his morale if he could receive the promotion he earned.

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

He enlisted in the National Guard on 25 May 1947 and served until 14 May 1954 when he was discharged for immediate enlistment in the Regular Army in the pay grade of E-6.  He enlisted on 15 May 1954 and served through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 22 June 1966.

On 10 January 1979 he submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement (DA Form 2339) whereas he requested retirement by reason of length of service to be effective 1 July 1979.  He indicated that his highest grade held while on active duty was the pay grade of E-7.

His application was approved and he was released from active duty on 30 June 1979 and was transferred to the Retired List in the pay grade of E-7 effective 1 July 1979.  He had served 26 years, 6 months and 7 days of total active service.

A review of his Official Military Personnel File shows that he was considered for promotion to the pay grade of E-8 by numerous Department of the Army Promotion Selection Boards.  However, there is no indication in the available records to show that he was ever selected for promotion prior to his retirement. 

Title 10, United States Code, provides, in pertinent part, that enlisted personnel may be advanced in grade to the highest grade satisfactorily held while on active duty, as determined by the Secretary of the Army, upon completion 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 advanced to a higher grade prior to his being placed on the Retired List.  The applicant has not submitted evidence with his application, and the evidence of record does not contain any evidence to show that he was ever promoted to a higher grade than he held at the time of retirement.  Therefore, there is no basis to promote him to a higher grade or to advance him on the Retired List.

3.  Given the passage of time and the fact that the applicant was considered by duly constituted promotion selection boards that had the advantage of reviewing the applicant’s records along with those of his peers at the time, it would be inappropriate for the Board to attempt to second-guess those boards who at the time were in the best position to determine who was best qualified to meet the needs of the Army at the time. 

4.  While the Board understands the applicant’s disappointment in not being promoted further, there are no provisions for advancing someone on the Retired List to a grade in which they have not previously held or had not satisfactorily served in.  Accordingly, the Board finds no error or injustice on the part of the Department in this case.

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

___ja ___  ___mes__  ___wtm _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000041674	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2000/11/16	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  319	131.0900/adv to high grd	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.