MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            22 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999030398

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James M. Alward		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ted S. Kanamine		Member	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		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 he be retired in the pay grade of E-6.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his last rank was that of a staff sergeant (SSG) in the pay grade of E-6 and yet he was retired in the pay grade of E-4.  He further states that he has waited for 2 years and desires to be retired in the pay grade of E-6.

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

He enlisted on 22 June 1977 and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 6 May 1985 and remained in that pay grade until nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him and he was reduced to the pay grade of E-5 on 29 January 1986.  He was again promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 11 October 1987 and was selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-7 to be effective 1 June 1994.  However, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him on 1 May 1994 that resulted in his being reduced to the pay grade of E-5 again.  

On 18 September 1996 he applied for voluntary retirement in the pay grade of   E-5 and his request was approved.  However, before he was retired for length of service, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him on 27 January 1997 for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-4 and 45 days of extra duty.

On 30 June 1997 he was honorably released from active duty and was transferred to the Retired list in the pay grade of E-4 effective 1 July 1997.  He had served 20 years and 9 days of total active service.

Title 10, United States Code, provides, in pertinent part, that enlisted personnel may be advanced in grade to the highest grade satisfactorily held, as determined by the Secretary of the Army, upon completion 30 years of service.  This service may consist of combined active service and service in the USAR Control Group (Retired) and the Army Grade Determination Board is the agency that reviews the records and/or applications for advancement on the Retired list in behalf of the Secretary, for those who have attained 30 years of service.

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.  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 the aforementioned requirement.

2.  In order to be advanced to a higher grade on the Retired list, the applicant must have at some time been advanced to a higher grade prior to his being placed on the Retired list and must have a combined total of 30 years of service (active and/or service on the Retired list).  The applicant has not yet attained 30 years of qualifying service to be eligible for review by the Army Grade Determination Board for advancement to the highest grade he satisfactorily held. Therefore, there is no basis to advance him on the Retired list to a grade higher than the grade of E-4 until such time as he has attained the qualifying years of service required by law. 

3.  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

___ja___  ___tsk___  __ao____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030398	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/03/22	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  306 	129.0400/HIGH GRD HELD	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.