RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            13 SEPTEMBER 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20050000200


      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. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Shirley Powell                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Robert Duecaster              |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Jeanette McCants              |     |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 the lost time recorded in item 29 of his
report of separation (DD Form 214) be removed.

2.  The applicant states that item 29 of his DD Form 214 incorrectly
reflects that he had 3 days of lost time.  He goes on to state that it is
in error and that someone must have transposed the information from someone
else’s records because he had no lost time.  He further states that he is
currently on active status with the National Guard and if his records are
requested from St. Louis they will bear out his contention that he had no
lost time.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 31 August 1994.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 8 December 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 enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) in
Houston, Texas, on 27 January 1990, for a period of 8 years under the
delayed enlistment program (DEP).  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 20
August 1990, for a period of 4 years and was trained as an armor crewman.

4.  He completed his one-station unit training (OSUT) at Fort Knox,
Kentucky, and was transferred to Germany on 16 January 1991.  He was
advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 1 July 1991 and to the pay grade of E-4
on 1 January 1992.

5.  He departed Germany on 4 January 1993 and was assigned to Fort Riley,
Kansas, on 25 February 1993.

6.  On 31 July 1993, the applicant was reported as being absent without
leave when he failed to report back from ordinary leave.  He remained
absent until he returned to military control at 1400 hours on 4 August
1993.  The record is silent as to any punishment imposed for that offense.
However, his date of rank and service dates were adjusted accordingly.

7.  On 1 June 1994, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him for
making a false official statement to a superior commissioned officer.  His
punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-2, a forfeiture
of pay, extra duty and restriction.

8.  On 14 June 1994, he was issued a general officer letter of reprimand
(GOLOR) for the illegal possession of an unregistered automatic pistol
which was discovered in his vehicle during a search by the Junction City
Police Department.  He was advised of his right to submit matters in his
own behalf before a filing decision was made by the imposing official.
However, the applicant failed to submit any matters in his own behalf.  The
chain of command recommended that it be filed in his Official Military
Personnel File due to his continued poor performance of duty and multiple
offenses punished under Article 15.  The commanders indicate that he had
three NJPs and was pending separation under chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-
200, for misconduct.  The imposing official directed that the GOLOR be
filed in his OMPF.

9.  On 11 August 1994, he was convicted by a summary court-martial of
disobeying a noncommissioned officer.  He was sentenced to be reduced to
the pay grade of E-1 and to forfeit $555.00 of pay for 1 month (suspended
until 10 November 1994).

10.  On 31 August 1994, he was honorably released from active duty under
the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, due to completion of
required service.  He had served 4 years of total active service and had 4
days of lost time due to AWOL.

11.  Army Regulation 635-5 serves as the authority and provides
instructions for the preparation and issuance of the DD Form 214.  It
provides, in pertinent part, that the Army preserve a record ( even after
lost time is made up) to explain which service between date of entry on
active duty (block 12a) and separation date (block 12b) is creditable
service.



DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show to the satisfaction of the Board, 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.

2.  The applicant’s contention that he had no lost time and that it was
entered in error has been noted and found to be without merit.  The
evidence of record clearly shows that he failed to report back from
ordinary leave on 31 July 1993 and remained absent until 3 August 1993.
Accordingly, his service dates and date of rank were adjusted to account
for the lost time.

3.  Accordingly, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted with
his application and the evidence of record that the lost time recorded on
his records is in error.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 31 August 1994; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 30 August 1997.  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

____SP _  ___RD __  ___JM___  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.




            _____Shirley Powell_________________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR200500002000                          |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/09/13                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD)                                    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY)                                  |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES                  |267/REM LOST TIME                       |
|1.123.0700              |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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