MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            16 November 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000042644

	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:  That he be advanced on the Retired List to the pay grade of E-7.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he declined his promotion to the pay grade of E-7 because he had already applied for retirement when the promotion took effect and that he desires to be advanced to that grade at this time.

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

He enlisted in the National Guard on 7 June 1950 and continued to serve until he was honorably discharged on 1 December 1953 to enlist in the Regular Army.

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 December 1953 and served through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 29 April 1966.

On 1 May 1973, orders were published by the Department of the Army which announced the applicant’s promotion to the pay grade of E-7.  They also specified that acceptance of the promotion automatically incurred a 2-year service remaining obligation prior to nondisability retirement. 

Although undated, the applicant submitted a statement whereby he declined promotion to the pay grade of E-7.  He signed the statement as an E-6.  Accordingly, his promotion orders were revoked by the Department on 25 June 1973.

On 20 December 1973 he submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement  (DA Form 2339) whereas he requested retirement by reason of length of service to be effective 1 January 1974.  He indicated that he highest grade he held on active duty was the pay grade of E-6.

His application was approved and he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) on 31 December 1973 and was placed on the Retired List in the pay grade of E-6 effective 1 January 1974.  He had served 20 years, 2 months and 14 days of total active service.

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.  However, the record clearly shows that he declined the promotion to the pay grade of E-7, presumably because he did not desire to serve the 2-year service remaining obligation. Therefore, there is no basis to promote him to a higher grade or to advance him on the Retired List.

3.  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.  The applicant was afforded the choice of accepting or declining the promotion and he chose to decline it.  Accordingly, the Board finds no error or injustice on the part of the Department in this case.

4.  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	AR2000042644	
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.