MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           27 September 2001                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001058752

	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. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. Eric N. Andersen		Member	
	Mr. Thomas E. O'Shaughnessy		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 his records be corrected to show that he was commissioned as a lieutenant or, in the alternative, that he was promoted to pay grade E-7 while he was in the Regular Army, and that he be given retroactive proficiency pay.  He would also like a waiver of the age limit for reentry on active duty and be allowed to reenter active duty in a commissioned status, or in pay grade E-7.  He also requests compensation by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) for brain damage and physical injuries he incurred in a Jeep accident, as well as compensation for the loss of his teeth.  

APPLICANT STATES:  He had one year of college while on active duty and later received a masters degree.  He was offered a commission while in basic combat training.  He also states that his records were falsified to make him look bad because he wouldn’t permit shoddy work and would not violate safety rules and regulations, which was the standard practice of his peers and superiors.  The applicant states that his request applies to his service in the Regular Army, the Army National Guard (ARNG) and the Air National Guard (ANG), but does not specify which correction applies to which service.

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

He entered on active duty in pay grade E-1 on 26 May 1958.  At that time, he stated that he had completed 8 years of grammar school and 4 years of high school.  He stated that he had not attended any college courses.

While in BCT he completed a statement of intent in which he stated that “The Army Officer Candidate Program has been fully explained to me, including the procedures for applying under the provisions of AR 350-50.  I do not desire to make application during my basic training (first 16 weeks).”

He was awarded the military occupational specialty of petroleum laboratory specialist and was promoted to pay grade E-5.

On 28 April 1961, the applicant was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the Army Reserve Group.

The applicant’s military records do not contain any evidence of him performing service in the ARNG or ANG.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant was given the opportunity to apply for Officer Candidate School (OCS) and declined that option.  There is no basis to commission him without his having completed OCS, and there is no reason to give him another opportunity to attend OCS at this late date.

2.  The applicant was promoted to pay grade E-5 with less than 3 years of service, which is considered rapid promotion.  The Board notes that the applicant did not have any college at the time of his enlistment.  The level of education is only taken into consideration in determining the pay grade in which a soldier is enlisted.  Education is not used for non-competitive promotions subsequent to enlistment.

3.  In view of the preceding conclusions, there would be no reason to grant the applicant’s request to grant him a waiver to reenter active duty.

4.  As for the applicant’s request that he be given retroactive proficiency pay, he has not submitted any evidence which would show that he was entitled to proficiency pay.

5.  The Board cannot address the applicant’s requests that pertains to his service in the ARNG since those records could not be located.

6.  The applicant’s requests pertaining to DVA benefits and his ANG service must be addressed to the DVA and the Air Force, respectively.

7.  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

___rvo___  ___ena__  ____teo _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001058752	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010927	
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.	128.09	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.