RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        30 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040009858


      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             |
|     |Ms. Rosa M. Chandler              |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Paul M. Smith                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Yolanda Maldonado             |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Leonard G. Hassell            |     |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's request is unclear.  It appears he is asking for two
corrections to be made to his military records:  (1) that his DD Form 214
(Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) issued on 15 March
1988 be corrected to show he entered on active duty 23 February 1973, not
26 November 1974; and (2) that his Home of Record (HOR) be corrected to
some unspecified location.

2.  The applicant states his Basic Active Service Date (BASD) is 23
February 1973; 26 November 1974 is the date of his first reenlistment.  He
adds that his HOR was changed on his second reenlistment on 27 August 1981.

3.  The applicant provides:

      a.  His DD Form 214 for the period 26 November 1974 through 15 March
1988.

      b.  His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 15 March 1988.  The application submitted in this case is
date stamped 15 November 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 enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years on 23 February
1973.  His DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Contract) showed his HOR as
Kansas City, Missouri.  He was honorably discharged on 25 November 1974 for
the purpose of immediate reenlistment.  He was given a DD Form 214 which
showed he enlisted on 23 February 1973 and was discharged on 25 November
1974 after serving 1 year, 9 months, and 3 days.

4.  The applicant reenlisted for 6 years on 26 November 1974 and his HOR
remained Kansas City, Missouri on his DD Form 4.  He reenlisted again on
27 August 1981.  This time his DD Form 4 showed Chicago, Illinois as his
HOR.  He reenlisted for the last time on 21 August 1985 and his HOR was
listed as Columbus, Georgia on his DD Form 4.

5.  The applicant was involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge
on 15 March 1988 by reason of a Department of the Army-imposed bar to
reenlistment under the qualitative management program.  His DD Form 214
showed service from 26 November 1974 to 15 March 1988.  He had 13 years,
3 months and 19 days of service for that period and 1 year, 9 months, and
2 [sic] days for the first period of service recorded on his first DD Form
214.

6.  Army Regulation 601-280 (Army Retention Program) prescribes criteria
for the Army Retention Program and sets forth policies and command
responsibilities for:  immediate reenlistment or extension of enlistment of
Soldiers currently serving in the Active Army; and enlistment/Transfer and
assignment of Soldiers processing from the Active Army to the Reserve
Components of the US Army.  It provides instructions for completing DD Form
4 and states, in pertinent part, the HOR is the place recorded as the home
of the individual when commissioned, appointed, enlisted, inducted, or
ordered into the relevant tour of active duty.  The place recorded as the
home of the individual when reinstated, reappointed, or reenlisted remains
the same as that recorded when commissioned, appointed, enlisted, or
inducted or ordered into the relevant tour of active duty unless there is a
break in service of more than one full day.  Only if a break in service
exceeds one full day, can the home of record be changed by the member.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no error or injustice in this case.  The applicant's DD Form
214 for the period 26 November 1974 through 15 March 1988 is correct.  The
date he entered on active duty for the period defined by that document was
26 November 1974.  The applicant has a separate DD Form 214 that captures
his BASD by showing that he served 1 year, 9 months, and 3 days from 23
February 1973 [his BASD] through 25 November 1974.

2.  The applicant entered on active duty on 23 February 1973 and listed his
HOR as Kansas City, Missouri.  Thereafter, he never had a break in service
and his HOR should have remained Kansas City.  The applicant has four DD
Forms 4 in
his record.  His initial enlistment and first reenlistment DD Forms 4
correctly show the same Kansas City HOR.  His second and third reenlistment
DD Forms 4 improperly changed his HOR to Chicago, Illinois and Columbus,
Georgia without the required 1 day break in service.  Kansas City,
therefore, remained the correct HOR.

3.  In any event, the applicant has not provided any information on what he
considers to be an incorrect HOR, or what he would like the HOR to read.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 15 March 1988; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on 14 March 1991.  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

__pms___  __ym____  __lgh___  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.



                                        Paul M. Smith
                                  ______________________
                                            CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040009858                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050830                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |( DENY)                                 |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.0000                                |
|2.                      |100.0200                                |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |





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