MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            6 March 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002076920

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		Member	
	Mr. Frank C. Jones II		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 receive his promotion to the pay grade of E-4 with entitlement to all back pay and allowances.

APPLICANT STATES:  That in January 1971, while attending "SERTS" training in South Vietnam, he was awarded an outstanding soldier promotion to the pay grade of E-4, by a lieutenant colonel.  However, he never received the advancement in pay grade or the pay associated with advancement. 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records, though somewhat incomplete, show:

He enlisted in Port Arthur, Texas, on 17 October 1969, for a period of 3 years and training as an aircraft maintenance apprentice.  He completed his basic combat training and was transferred to Fort Rucker, Alabama, for his advanced individual training (AIT).  Upon completion of his AIT he was transferred to Vietnam on 14 April 1970. 

He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 6 January 1971 and departed Vietnam on 17 March 1971, for assignment to Fort Stewart, Georgia, where he remained until he was honorably released from active duty on 1 February 1972, for the purpose of joining a Texas Army National Guard Unit (TXARNG).  He had served 2 years, 3 months and 15 days of total active service.

A review of his records fails to show his record of assignments in Vietnam and also fails to show any courses attended in Vietnam.  It appears that at one point, the applicant's records were either lost or misplaced because there are indications in the available records that the applicant departed without his records.

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.  While the Board does not have the benefit of reviewing all of the applicant's records during the period in question, his records show that he was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 6 January 1971 and that he continued to serve in that pay grade until he was discharged on 1 February 1972.

2.  Although the board cannot verify his attendance at a course in Vietnam, the applicant claims to have attended the course in January 1971, which coincides with his promotion to the pay grade of E-4.  Accordingly, absent evidence to the contrary, the Board finds no basis to promote him further.

3.  The Board also notes that the passage of time (30+ years) and the lack of complete records, make it difficult at best to determine what actually happened in the applicant's case.  Therefore, the Board must presume, given the lack of evidence to show otherwise, that what the Army did at the time was correct. 

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

___lds  __  ___fcj___  __wtm___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002076920	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2003/03/06	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  310	131.000/prom	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.