RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           16 June 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040006584


      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             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Raymond J. Wagner             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin              |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Delia R. Trimble              |     |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 records be corrected to
show he was advanced to Private First Class (PFC), E-3 while in the Army
National Guard.

2.  The applicant states that he served his time honorably and attended 8
drills.  He was promised his PFC but the paperwork was not done.

3.  The applicant provides no supporting evidence.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 1 May 1985.  The application submitted in this case was
received on              1 September 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 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.  The applicant was born on 12 June 1950.  He enlisted in the Regular
Army on 6 May 1980.  He arrived at Fort Jackson, SC for advanced individual
training on or about 7 July 1980.  On 25 August 1980, he accepted
nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice.
His punishment was 7 days confinement in the Correctional Custody Facility
and a forfeiture (suspended) of $104.00 pay for one month.  Separation
action was initiated on 5 September 1980 and on 25 September 1980 he was
honorably discharged under the Trainee Discharge Program as a Private, E-1.
 His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and
his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) indicate he did not
complete advanced individual training.

4.  The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard on 3 October 1984.
His Army National Guard enlistment contract is not available.  He was
honorably discharged from the Army National Guard of New York and as a
Reserve of the Army on 1 May 1985 as a Private, E-1.  Item 13 (Primary
Specialty Number, Title, and Date Awarded) of his NGB Form 22 (Report of
Separation and Record of Service) indicates he had not been awarded a
military occupational specialty.

5.  National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management) in
effect at the time, chapter 6 provided that, to be advanced to PFC, the
Soldier must have successfully completed initial active duty for training.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant did not complete advanced
individual training while in the Regular Army and did not complete initial
active duty for training while in the Army National Guard.

2.  The applicant's Army National Guard enlistment contract is not
available and he provides no evidence to show he was "promised" advancement
to PFC.  There is no evidence of record to show he was ever advanced to
Private, E-2 and the available evidence shows he did not meet the
eligibility criteria for advancement to PFC.

3.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 1 May 1985; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on          30 April 1988.  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

__rjw___  __kwl___  __drt___  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                 |AR20040006584                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050616                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |131.09                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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