RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        7 June 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070000830


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Gerard W. Schwartz            |     |Acting Director      |
|     |Ms. Deyon D. Battle               |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Carmen Duncan                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Michael Flynn                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Jeffrey Redmann               |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that he be reinstated on active duty in the Army
and promoted to the pay grade of E-7 in accordance with the Recommended
List for Promotion of Enlisted Personnel.

2.  The applicant states that he was not aware of the promotion list until
11 January 2007, when he received the list from the Department of Veterans
Affairs.  He states that he was not allowed to retire because the promotion
list was not available.  He states that he should have been promoted to the
pay grade of E-7 and then allowed to retire.  The applicant states that he
would have stayed in the Army if he had not been stressed out at that time.
 He states that he believes that he was unjustly charged in some of the
things that were said about him.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentation in support of his
application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 6 October 1976.  The application submitted in this case
is dated 12 January 2007.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for
correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery
of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  On 31 August 1962, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army in
Chicago, Illinois, for 3 years, in the pay grade of E-2.  He went on to
successfully complete his training as an armor intelligence specialist.  He
remained on active duty through a series of reenlistments.

4.  The available records show that the applicant was promoted to the pay
grade of E-6 on 20 June 1967.


5.  On 20 May 1970, the applicant was notified that his name was included
on a Recommended List for Promotion of Enlisted Personnel to the pay grade
of E-7.  The notification indicates that he scored 692.5 points; that his
promotion selection date was December 1969; and that having been selected
for promotion under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-200, he would be
promoted in the order of merit as listed in the notification as grade and
military occupational specialty vacancies occurred and allocations were
received.  The promotion list indicates that his name was integrated on the
list and that his list points would be converted upon receipt of his
Promotion Board Proceedings and allied papers from his former unit of
assignment.

6.  On 30 June 1970, the applicant appeared before the Fort MacArthur
Enlisted Promotion Selection Board and in a Disposition Form dated 8 July
1970, he was notified that the provisions of Deputy Chief of Staff for
Personnel Department of the Army Message Date Time Group 282228Z, Subject:
Centralized Promotion to Grade E-7, permitted selection of only two
individuals from those considered.  He was informed that he was recommended
by the board; but not selected for promotion to the pay grade of E-7 due to
competitive insufficiencies.

7.  The applicant was honorably discharged from the Army on 6 October 1976,
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5-37, for failure
to demonstrate promotion potential.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 serves as the authority for the separation of
enlisted personnel.  Chapter 5-37, then in effect, provided discharge for
failure to demonstrate promotion potential.  This regulation stated, in
pertinent part, that those personnel whose performance of duty,
acceptability for the service and potential for continued effective
service, fall below the standards required for enlisted personnel in the
United States Army may be discharged.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The available evidence indicates that the applicant was properly
discharged in the pay grade of E-6.

2.  The applicant's contentions have been noted, along with the
documentation that he submitted in behalf of his appeal.  However, although
his name was included on a Recommended List for Promotion to the pay grade
of E-7, he was notified on 8 July 1970, that he was recommended, but not
selected for promotion by the board due to competitive insufficiencies.


3.  The applicant was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 20 June 1967, and
he continued to serve in the same pay grade until he was discharged on 6
October 1976.  He has submitted insufficient evidence to support his
contention that he was not allowed to retire because the promotion list was
not available; that he just recently became aware of the recommended
promotion list; that he should have been retired in the pay grade of E-7;
or that he should be reinstated on active duty in the Army.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show 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 to be reinstated on active duty in the pay grade of E-
7.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 6 October 1976; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 5 October 1979.  The applicant did not file within the
3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation
or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__CD ___  __MF ___  __JR____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.




2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




                                  _____Carmen Duncan_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070000830                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070607                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  310  |131.0000/PROMOTION                      |
|2.  320                 |131.1000/FAILURE OF SELECTION           |
|3.  192                 |110.0300/REINSTATEMENT                  |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]