RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        27 January 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040001443


      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. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. David S. Griffin              |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Raymond J. Wagner             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Eloise C. Prendergast         |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Brenda K. Koch                |     |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, in effect, that his date of release from active
duty be changed from 8 December 1971 to 8 December 1972.

2.  The applicant states that 8 December 1971 is an incorrect date.

3.  The applicant provides no evidence in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error, which
occurred on
8 December 1971, the date of his release from active duty.  The application
submitted in this case is dated 26 April 2004.

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 limitation 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.  The applicant's military records show he was inducted on 26 March 1970
for a period of 2 years.  He successfully completed basic combat and
advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational
specialty 91B20 (medical specialist).  He was released from active duty on
8 December 1971 after one year, eight months, and 13 days of active service
characterized as honorable.

4.  Headquarters U.S. Army Training Center and Fort Campbell Special Orders
Number 289 (Extract), dated 7 December 1971, show that the applicant was
relieved from active duty not by reason of physical disability and
transferred to the United States Army Reserve effective 2400 hours, 8
December 1971.

5.  Item 11d (Effective Date) of the applicant's DD Form 214 (Armed Forces
of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), shows that the
effective date of release from active duty is 8 December 1971.

6.  The applicant's records contain no evidence that he was retained on
active duty after 8 December 1971.

7.  The applicant's has not provided any evidence that he was retained
active duty after 8 December 1971.

8.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), then in effect,
established the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD
Form 214.  This regulation provides, in pertinent part, that the date of
release from active duty be entered in item 11b (Effective Date).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that the separation date on his DD Form 214 is
incorrect and should be 8 December 1972.

2.  There is no evidence of record and the applicant has not provided any
evidence to show that the date of release from active duty, 8 December
1971, is incorrect.

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must,
or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or
unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy
that requirement.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error now
under consideration on 8 December 1971; therefore, the time for the
applicant to file a request for correction of any error expired on 7
December 1974.  However, 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

___ecp__  ___bkk __  ___rjw___ 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.




                                  _____Raymond J. Wagner_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |Arar20040001443                         |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050127                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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