MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            17 April 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000050765

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John H. Kern		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		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 rank of major (MAJ).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that if there were some error in his not being promoted in 1945, he would like to be promoted now.  If there were no error, he would still like to be promoted based on his having served as a battalion executive officer, which was a MAJ’s job in 1945.  

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

He entered active duty on 12 April 1942 and served until being honorably relieved from active duty, by reason of demobilization, on 15 January 1946.  At the time of his separation the applicant had completed a total of 3 years, 
9 months, and 1 day of active military service.

A War Department (WD) Adjutant General Office (AGO) Form 53-55 (Military Record and Report of Separation-Certificate of Service) was issued to and signed by the applicant on the date of his separation, 15 January 1946.  This document also confirms that he held the rank of captain (CPT) on the date of his separation and his signature would attest to the fact that he verified the information contained in this document; thereby, confirming the rank entry was correct.

The separation document also shows that he served in the European Theater of Operations (ETO) from 22 May 1944 until 28 July 1945 and that he participated in the Normandy, Northern France, Rhineland, Ardennes, and Central Europe campaigns of World War II.  Further, the WD AGO 53-55 indicates that, during his tenure on active duty, he earned the Bronze Star Medal and the 
European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with 5 bronze service stars.

A WD AGO Form 100 (Army Qualification Record) on file confirms that at the time of his separation the applicant held the rank of CPT.  It also shows that during his tenure on active duty he served in the following positions for the periods indicated:  Armored Infantry Commander, 9 months; Aide de Camp, 
9 months; Combat Liaison Officer, 9 months; Operations & Training Staff Officer, 6 months; Troop Commander, 6 months; and Battalion Executive Officer, 
1 month, with a remark that he filled this last position for only the three weeks just prior to his separation.  

In addition, there is no indication in the record that the applicant was ever formally recommended or considered for promotion to MAJ while serving on active duty.  Further, the last efficiency report he received on active duty evaluated his performance as a CPT, Troop Commander.  

Army promotion policy has never established that a commissioned officer serving in a position calling for a higher grade as a sole criteria allowing for promotion to the next higher grade.  In addition, there have never been any codified provisions that allow for a commissioned officer’s promotion sans a recommendation or directive from the properly designated promotion authority. 

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 noted the applicant’s contention that he should be promoted to MAJ because he served in a position calling for that rank.  However, after a review of his record of service, the Board finds no evidentiary basis for relief.

2.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant served as a battalion executive officer for three weeks just prior to his separation.  However, this alone does not warrant his being promoted and there is no evidence that shows he was eligible, considered, recommended, or selected for promotion to MAJ during his active duty tenure.  Thus, the Board concludes that he was properly and equitably separated as a CPT and finds no associated error or injustice.

3.  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.

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

__mvt ___  ___mm__  ___jhk __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000050765	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2001/04/17	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1946/01/15	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	RR 1-5	
DISCHARGE REASON	Demobilization	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  310	131.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.