MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            22 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999030989

	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.

	Ms. Deyon D. Battle		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:  Correction of his military records to show that he was advanced to pay grade E- 3.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he served in the pay grade of E-2 for 9 months and 6 days and that his chain of command failed to timely recommend him for promotion prior to his discharge.

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

On 14 July 1972, he enlisted in the Army for 2 years in the pay grade of E-1 and he successfully completed his training as a power electric generator operator.  On 21 September 1972, he was promoted to the pay grade of E-2.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not on file.  The Certificate of Release or Discharge, DD Form 214, indicates that the applicant was discharged on 19 April 1973, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 6 for hardship.  He had completed 9 months and 6 days of total active service and he was furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

Army Regulation 600-200, at paragraph 7-12, then in effect, stated that advancement to pay grade E-3 was not mandatory.  Commanders could, without constraint, advance service members who had completed 12 months time in service and 4 months time in grade.  Waiver of 2 months time in grade was authorized.  To recognize outstanding performance, commanders could advance service members to pay grade E-3 who had at least 6 but less than 12 months time in service.  Two months time in grade could be waived.  The number of service members that could be given such accelerated advancement was restricted by Headquarters, Department of the Army.

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 actions by the Army in this case appear to have been proper, and there is no doubt to be resolved in favor of the applicant.

2.  His contention have been noted by the Board.  However, they are unsupported by the evidence of record.  The record clearly shows that he enlisted in the Army on 14 July 1972 and he was promoted to the pay grade of E-2 on 21 September 1972.  In accordance with Army Regulation 600-200, then in effect, advancement to pay grade E-3 was not mandatory.

3.  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.

4.  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	AR1999030989	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/03/22	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  310	131.0000	
2.  313	131.0300	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.