MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            9 January 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000047605

	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. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Eric N. Anderson		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-8.

APPLICANT STATES:  That based upon an article appearing in the Army Echoes he should be advanced on the retired list to the pay grade of E-8.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) dated 12 March 1967 indicating his rank as master sergeant.

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

The applicant honorably retired in the pay grade of E-7 on 1 October 1968.  His highest rank attained was master sergeant.

The applicant was the first sergeant for the Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 7th Infantry Division, Korea when he received nonjudical punishment (NJP) on 10 July 1967 for disobeying two lawful orders.  He entertained a female foreign national on the Camp Casey Compound and allowed an unauthorized individual to be transported in a government vehicle.  As punishment he was reduced to the pay grade of E-7 and required to forfeit $100.00 for one month.

The file indicates the applicant submitted a request to the Board to have his rank restored and to have the NJP removed from his official military personnel file.  The Board denied his request on 20 December 1967.

The applicant requested advancement on the retired list to the pay grade of E-8 to the Army Grade Determination Board (AGRDB).  The AGRDB determined that the applicant did not serve satisfactorily at the pay grade of E-8 and denied his request for advancement on the retired list on 28 September 2000.

Title 10, United States Code, Section 3964, provides that a retired enlisted member or warrant officer of the Army who is retired with less than 30 years of active service is entitled, when his active service plus his service on the retired list totals 30 years, to be advanced on the retired list to the highest grade in which he served on active duty satisfactorily, (or, in the case if a member of the National Guard, in which he served on full-time duty satisfactorily), as determined by the Secretary of the Army.

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.  The Board concurs with the findings of the AGRDB that the applicant did not serve satisfactorily at the pay grade of E-8 as evidenced by his reduction by NJP for disobeying two lawful orders and that he should be retained on the retired list in the pay grade of E-7.

2.  The applicant compromised the special trust and confidence placed in him as an noncommissioned officer (NCO).  The applicant, as an NCO had the duty to support and abide by all orders issued to him.  His misconduct diminished the quality of his service below that meriting advancement on the retired list to the pay grade of E-8.

3.  Based upon the applicant’s overall service, the Board concluded that the applicant’s retired pay grade of E-7 was the highest grade he held satisfactorily while on active duty.

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

__MDM _  __CLG__  __ENA___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000047605	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010109	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.