RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           11 January 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004106456


      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. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Linda D. Simmons              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carol A. Kornhoff             |     |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 Item 22 (Statement of Service)
of his
4 October 1973 separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that Item 22a1 (Net Service This
Period),
Item 22a(3) (Total) and 22b (Total Active Service) of his 4 October 1973
DD Form 214 are in error.  He claims Item 22a(1) should read 2 years, 2
months and 5 days, Item 22a(3) should read 14 years, 3 months and 28 days,
Item 22b should read 14 years, 3 months and 28 days, and Item 22c (Foreign
Service) should read 2 years, 10 months and 17 days.  He further claims
that 60 days of the time lost period 26 May 1972 through 6 September 1972
identified in Item 26a (Non-Pay Periods Time Lost) was actually approved
leave.

3.  The applicant provides no documentary evidence in support of his
application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 4 October 1973.  The application submitted in this case is
dated
1 March 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 record shows that he initially enlisted in the Regular
Army and entered active duty on 18 December 1957.  He served for 2 years, 9
months and 26 until 13 October 1960, at which time he was honorably
separated and transferred to the United States Army Reserve (USAR).

4.  On 5 January 1961, he reenlisted in the Regular Army and reentered
active duty.  He served for 2 years, 11 months and 8 days until being
honorably separated and transferred to the USAR on 12 December 1963.
5.  On 1 July 1964, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army and again
entered active duty.  He served for 2 years, 10 months and 3 days until
being honorably discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment on 3
May 1967.

6.  On 4 May 1967, he reenlisted in the Regular Army and served for 3
years,
6 months and 16 days until 19 November 1970, at which time he was honorably
discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment.

7.  On 20 November 1970, the applicant immediately reenlisted for four
years and began his last period of active duty service.  His Enlisted
Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows, in Item 31 (Foreign Service), that
he completed
27 months of overseas service prior to 1 January 1960 and tours of duty in
Germany, Italy and Vietnam between 6 July 1961 and 7 January 1969.  It
further shows that he served in Germany for 11 months between 3 February
1969 and 26 January 1970.  Finally, it confirms that during the period
covered by the
DD Form 214 in question, he completed 10 months and 17 days of overseas
service in Germany and 12 months in Vietnam.

8  On 4 October 1973, the applicant was separated under the provisions of
chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service, in lieu
of trial by court-martial and received a general, under honorable
conditions discharge.

9.  The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he entered active duty on the
period covered by the separation document on 20 November 1970, and that he
accrued 250 days of time lost due to AWOL.

10.   Item 22a(1) of the DD Form 214 contains an entry indicating that the
applicant completed 1 year, 2 months and 5 days of creditable active
military service during the period covered by the separation document.
Item 22a(2) shows he completed a total of 12 years, 1 month and 23 days of
prior active military service and Item 22a(3) shows he completed a total of
13 years,
3 months and 28 days of military service.  Item 22b shows he completed a
total of 13 years, 3 months and 28 days of creditable active military
service and Item 22c shows he completed 1 year, 10 months and 17 days of
foreign service during this enlistment period.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim that the service entered in Item 22 of his 4
October 1973 separation document is in error was carefully considered and
found to have merit.  The evidence of record confirms the total period of
active military service covered by the DD Form 214 in question is 2 years,
10 months and 15 days.  It further shows the applicant accrued 250 days of
time lost during this period.

2.  In view of the total period covered by the DD Form 214, minus the lost
time accrued, the applicant should have been credited with completion of 2
years,
2 months and 5 days of active military service.  Thus, it would be
appropriate to correct the entry in Item 22a(1) to reflect this period of
creditable active duty service.  As a result of this correction, the total
active military service listed in Item 22a(3) and 22b should also be
corrected to read 14 years, 3 months and
28 days.

3.  The applicant’s claim that Item 22c of his DD Form 214 should read 2
years, 10 months and 17 days was also carefully considered.  However, his
DA Form 20 confirms that during the period covered by the DD Form 214 in
question, he completed 12 months of service in Vietnam and 9 months and 4
days of service in Germany.  Therefore, only 1 year, 9 months and 4 days of
foreign service during this period is confirmed by the record.  This is
less than the 1 year,
10 month and 17 day total of foreign service already documented in Item
22c.  Thus, in order to avoid a less favorable outcome to the applicant, no
adjustment will be made to this item.

4.  The applicant’s claim that 60 days of the period of time lost between
26 May 1972 through 6 September 1972 was actually approved leave was also
considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence of record and the
applicant has failed to provide independent evidence to support this claim.
 Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to support an adjustment to this
period of time lost.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT RELIEF

___JTM _  __LDS__  __CAK___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely
file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army
records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending his 4 October
1973 DD Form 214 as follows:  Item 22a(1) - delete the current entry and
replace it with the entry
“2 years, 2 months, 5 days” and Item 22a(3) and Item 22b - delete the
current entries and replace them with the entry “14 years, 3 months, 28
days”; and by providing him a corrected separation document that reflects
these changes.


2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
an adjustment of time lost and to the documented foreign service contained
on the DD Form 214 in question.




            ____Linda D. Simmons ___
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004106456                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005-01-11                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |GD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1973/10/04                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200 C10                          |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |In Lieu of CM                           |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT PARTIAL                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.   1021|100.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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