MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  26 July 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2001056680

	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	
	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Eric N. Anderson		Member	
	Mr. Hubert O. Fry		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 DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show that he was separated in the rank of “SSG/E6” instead of “SGT(T)/E5.”

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was promoted to SSG/E6 on 16 September 1968, was assigned to the Company B, Aviation Support, that his DD Form 
214 shows his rank as “SGT(T)/E5”, and that he was not paid as an E-6 after
his promotion.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 and a copy of a Disposition Form (In Processing Route Sheet), dated 16 September 1968. 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he enlisted
on 11 August 1966 as a general vehicle repairman (63C).  He served in 
Vietnam from 16 August 1967 to 15 August 1968 and was honorably 
discharged on 8 August 1969.

The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows his rank as “SGT(T)” and his pay grade 
as “E5.”

Headquarters, 1st Infantry Division Special Orders Number 25, dated 
25 January 1968, promoted the applicant to SGT/E-5.

The applicant provided a copy of a Disposition Form, dated 16 September 1968, which shows that the applicant was assigned to Company B, Aviation Support and was positioned as the motor sergeant in the pay grade of E6 in the duty military occupational specialty (DMOS) of 63C40.

There is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant’s has provided no evidence, to show that he was ever considered or recommended for promotion to the rank of SSG/E6.

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 evidence of record shows that he was discharged on 8 August 1969 
from active duty in the rank of “SGT(T)” and in the pay grade of “E5.”

2.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that he was promoted to the 
rank of SSG on 16 September 1968; however, his Disposition Form, dated 16 September 1968, shows that the applicant was positioned as a motor sergeant for Company B, Aviation Support in the pay grade of E6 in the DMOS 
of 63C40.  The Board also notes that this duty position did not entitle the applicant to the rank of SSG, or promotion to the pay grade of E-6.  

3.  There is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to show that he was considered or recommended for promotion to the pay grade of E6 prior to his separation date.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 to show his rank as SSG/E-6.

4.  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.  

5.  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

__ro____  ___ea___  __hf____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001056680	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010726	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19690808	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  307		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.