MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           2 October 2001                    
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001061277

	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. Lee Cates		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		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: That his records be corrected to show his rank as sergeant (SGT), his branch as Infantry and his most significant assignment as Headquarters Company, 8th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that at the time, the rank of corporal (CPL) was equivalent to today’s SGT and that recruit was the lowest enlisted rank.  He contends that when he was promoted to corporal, it was equivalent to E-5 pay grade.  Further, he indicates that since his discharge, the Army has reinstated the rank of SGT E-5.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records were lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973.  Information herein was obtained from alternate sources.

On 9 June 1948, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years.

On 20 January 1950, he was advanced to private first class (Permanent).

On 25 June 1951, he was advanced to CPL (Grade 4) (Temporary).

Public Law 624 caused him to be involuntarily retained in service for 344 days beyond his normal expiration of term of service (ETS).

On 22 May 1952, he was honorably separated, in the rank of CPL (Temporary), under Army Regulation 615-360, based on his ETS.  His separation document indicates he had 3 years, 11 months and 14 days of creditable service.  In addition, he had 2 years, 5 months and 14 days service in Korea and Japan.  This document also shows his most significant assignment as “Hq Btry 10th AAA AW Bn” and his branch or classification as “Arty”.

The Enlisted Grade Structure of the Army, effective 21 January 1951, indicates, in pertinent part, a “Grade 4 corporal”, “Grade 5 sergeant” and “Grade 6 sergeant first class”.  This same structure shows that the rank of “recruit” came into existence effective 1 August 1948 and was changed to “Grade 1 private E-1” effective 21 January 1951.  On 1 June 1958, the rank of recruit was again used for the lowest enlisted rank.

The current Enlisted Grade Structure of the Army indicates, in pertinent part, Pay Grade E-4 CPL, Pay Grade E-5 SGT and Pay Grade E-6 staff sergeant (SSG).

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 applicant is not entitled to have his records corrected to show his rank as SGT, his branch as Infantry and his most significant assignment as Headquarters Company, 8th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division.  He has not shown error or injustice for the relief he is now requesting.

2.  There is no evidence that the rank of CPL was the equivalent of any pay grade except Grade 4 (currently E-4).

3.  During the applicant’s period of service the rank of SSG did not exist.  On      1 August 1948, that rank was no longer used until it was brought back into use on 1 June 1958.

4.  The evidence of record clearly shows the applicant’s branch of service was Artillery, based on his most significant assignment and assigned branch.

5.  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.

6.  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

_mkp____  _kak____  _rtd____   DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001061277	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20011002	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.