MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           12 April 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000049078

	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. Roger W. Able		Chairperson	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		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:  That his retired pay grade E-4 be corrected to pay grade E-6.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he should be retired in the highest pay grade he held satisfactorily on active duty.

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

The applicant entered the Army on 8 June 1955.  He was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 05E20 (Voice Radio Operator).  His awards include the Army Commendation Medal (1st OLC), the Good Conduct Medal (5th Award), the Vietnam Service Medal with 8 bronze service stars, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 60 Device, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation Badge, and the National Defense Service Medal.  His highest pay grade attained was E-6.

The file shows while in pay grade of E-6 the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) on 29 September 1996 for curfew violation, on 19 November 1966 for disobeying an NCO, on 12 September 1967 for driving a military vehicle under the influence of alcohol, on 16 February 1972 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 12 February to 15 February 1972, on 11 October 1973 for being AWOL from 9 October 1973 to 10 October 1973, and on 18 July 1974 for being AWOL from 17 July to 18 July 1974.  On his last NJP his punishment consisted of reduction to pay grade E-5, forfeiture of $200.00 for 2 months, and restriction to the company area for 30 days.

On 27 July 1974 the applicant received NJP for breaking restrictions.

The applicant was reduced to pay grade E-4 and pay grade E-3 but the file is absent of the facts and circumstances pertaining to these reductions.

He was promoted to pay grade E-4 on 3 July 1975 and honorably retired in that pay grade on 31 July 1975.

The applicant submitted an application to the Army Grade Determination Board (AGRDB) requesting advancement on the retired list to the pay grade of E-6.  The AGRDB determined that the applicant did not serve satisfactorily at the pay grade of E-6.  However, the AGRDB determined that the highest grade in which the applicant served satisfactorily was pay grade E-5.

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 ADGRB denied the applicant advancement on the retired list to pay grade 
E-6 but determined the highest grade he served satisfactorily while on active duty was pay grade E-5.

2.  This Board agrees with the ADGRB that the applicant did not serve satisfactorily at the pay grade of E-6 as evidenced by the six NJPs that included a reduction to pay grade E-5 for curfew violations, disobeying an NCO, driving a military vehicle under the influence of alcohol, and being AWOL on three occasions.  His continual acts of misconduct clearly show that he did not serve satisfactorily in pay grade E-6.

3.  Based upon the applicant’s overall service, the Board determined that pay grade E-5 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

__RWA__  __RTD___  __DPH___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000049078	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010412	
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.	129.04	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.