MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            7 May 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002069040

	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:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin  		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 he retired in the rank of command sergeant major (CSM), pay grade E-9.

APPLICANT STATES: That the regulations at the time of his retirement, pertaining to a CSM requesting retirement after they had served as a CSM in an outstanding manner, was unjust, not only to himself, but to any sergeant major (SGM), pay grade E-9.  It was unjust then and he feels that it would be unjust today, if the regulation still read the same.  He was not kicked out of the CSM Program and did not ask to get out of the program to avoid a court-martial.  In essence, the regulation stated that if an individual CSM voluntarily withdrew from the program for any reason other than assignment limitations due to physical conditions incurred in the line of duty, he or she would retire as a SGM.  He withdrew from the program because of unjust and unfair treatment and the words used to convey the unjust and unfair treatment.

He further indicates that it has been embarrassing for him to exist among his family, Army friends (officers and enlisted) and civilians as a retired SGM rather than a retired CSM.  Almost every one remembers that he served as a CSM and does not understand why he was not able to retire as a CSM.  He is now           68 years old and would like for his records to be corrected for historical reasons and respect for the short time that he has left.

He provides copies of a DA Form 2339 (Application for voluntary Retirement), dated 7 October 1980, which is annotated “SGM, E9, [applicant] served as a CSM, from 22 Sep 75 to 26 Mar 80.  He voluntarily withdrew from the CSM Program for reasons other than an assignment limiting physical conditions incurred in LD”; a copy of his final DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), dated 30 June 1981; an Army Reserve Components Personnel and Administration Center letter of pre-assignment for mobilization with a copy of Orders F-08-011896, pre-assigning him to Fort Myer, Virginia; and Army Training Center Engineer and Fort Leonard Wood Permanent Order 22-1 (with allied paperwork), dated 7 May 1981 announcing award of the Meritorious Service Medal to the applicant.

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

During the period 21 May 1954 to 21 September 1975, the applicant served in the Army of the United States and the Regular Army, attaining the rank of SGM.

During the period 22 September 1975 to 31 March 1980, he served in the rank of CSM, until he was voluntarily laterally appointed back to SGM.

On 30 June 1981, he was honorably separated in the rank of SGM and placed on the Retired List the following day.  His DD Form 214 indicates he had 27 years,  1 month and 10 days of creditable service.
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 12-16 (Grade title on retired list of former command sergeants major) indicates at subparagraph a, that noncommissioned officers holding the grade title of CSM, at retirement, will be placed on the retired list in the grade title, CSM, only if they served satisfactorily as a CSM and were released from the CSM Program, voluntarily or involuntarily, because of an assignment-limiting medical or physical condition.  Subparagraph b indicates that soldiers released from the CSM Program because of the following reasons will not be placed on the retired list in the grade title of CSM:  (1) Unsatisfactory conduct or inadequate performance of duty,  (2) Voluntary withdrawal for reasons other than assignment-limiting medical or physical condition, and (3) Holding the grade of master sergeant or first sergeant or below on the date of retirement.

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 clearly shows, as confirmed by the applicant, that he did not fulfill the necessary requirements to qualify for retirement in the grade title of CSM.

2.  The applicant indicates that he withdrew from the CSM Program because of unjust and unfair treatment, but fails to submit evidence to support his statement. He voluntarily withdrew from the CSM Program for reasons other than those listed in the regulation.

3.  His contentions have been noted; however, neither his application nor the evidence of record shows he was unfairly removed from the CSM Program or that he was unfairly retired in the grade title of SGM.

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

_sac____  _jtm____  _kwl_____ DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002069040	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020507	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	A92.13	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.