MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            1 March 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000048197

	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. John H. Kern		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		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 advanced on the Retired List to the pay grade of E-8.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he served as a first sergeant (E-8) for approximately 3 years while assigned as a United States Army Reserve (USAR) sergeant first class (E-7) in the 645th Quartermaster Company.  He goes on to state that he was replaced with another individual in the pay grade of E-7 from the National Guard who remained long enough to be promoted to the pay grade of E-8 and then transferred back to the National Guard and was subsequently promoted to the pay grade of E-9.  He further states that during his 20 years of service he only missed three meetings and he believes that he got a bad deal out of serving as a first sergeant and not getting promoted.

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

He was inducted on 8 March 1951 and served on active duty until he was honorably released from active duty on 7 March 1953 and was transferred to the USAR.  He remained in the USAR in an active status through a series of continuous reenlistments and was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 28 August 1960.

On 20 May 1974 the Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN) notified the applicant (20-year letter) that he had completed the required years of service to be eligible for retired pay at age 60 (19 December 1989).  By this time he had already been transferred to the Retired Reserve with 20 creditable years of service.

A review of his records shows that he served as the first sergeant in an E-8 position with the 645th Quartermaster Company from 1 January 1968 to 31 December 1970.

In the processing of this application a staff advisory opinion was provided by the Total Army Personnel Command (ARPERSCOM) Reserve Components Promotions Branch which opined that there was no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant was ever promoted to the pay grade of E-8 and that there are no provisions to do so at this time.  It also opined that service in the next higher grade was not a basis for promotion and/or pay and that only the properly designated authorities could do so if deemed appropriate and that they would have done so in the form of publishing orders to that effect.  The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment and to date no response has been received by the Board.

Army Regulation 140-10, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the assignment, attachment, detail, and transfer of USAR soldiers.  Chapter 7 of that regulation relates to the removal of soldiers from active status and states, in pertinent part, that soldiers removed from an active status will be discharged or, if qualified and if they so request, will be transferred to the Retired Reserve. 

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), 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.  While the Board understands the applicant’s desire to be promoted to the next higher grade, there is no evidence to suggest that he was not properly considered for promotion at the time in question.  The Board finds that his contention that he served in a position authorized the next higher pay grade as insufficient to warrant a promotion in itself.  The Board also recognizes that many soldiers serve in positions authorized a higher grade than that which they currently hold.  However, they also know that unless they are promoted by the appropriate authority, they continue to serve without the benefit of the pay for the position.  In many cases, successful service in a position of a higher grade serves to support the promotion authority’s decision to select an individual for promotion to that grade.  However, the final decision rests ultimately with the promotion authority.

3.  Inasmuch as there is no evidence to show that the applicant was ever promoted above the pay grade of E-7, the grade in which he was retired and since there is no evidence to show that he was unjustly denied promotion consideration, there is no basis for the Board to direct his promotion to the pay grade of E-8.

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

___rtd___  ___jhk __  __clg  ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000048197	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/03/01	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  319	131.0900/ADV IN GRD	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.