RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           25 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050002472


      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:

|     |Mr. James E. Anderholm            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Jose A. Martinez              |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas            |     |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 her record be corrected by
deleting any reference entry pertaining to her being absent without leave
(AWOL).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, her separation document (DD Form 214)
shows she was AWOL for three days, but she was never AWOL.

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

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 1 August 1996.  The application submitted in this case was
received on 15 February 2005.

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’s record shows she enlisted in the Regular Army and
entered active duty on 8 September 1988.  She was trained in, awarded and
served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 92Y (Supply Specialist),
and the highest rank she attained while serving on active duty was sergeant
(SGT).

4.  The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains a
Personnel Action (DA Form 4187) showing, while she was assigned to the
123rd Signal Battalion, Fort Stewart, Georgia, her duty status was changed
from present for duty (PDY) to AWOL, effective 0001 hours, 20 July 1996.  A
second DA Form 4187 on file shows her duty status was changed from AWOL to
PDY, effective 0630 hours, 24 July 1996.  These status change documents
were approved and signed by her unit commander.

5.  On 1 August 1996, the applicant was honorably separated at the
expiration of her term of service (ETS).  The separation document (DD Form
214) she was issued at the time confirms she completed a total of 7 years,
10 months and 20 days of creditable active military service, and that she
accrued 4 days of time lost due to AWOL.

6.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes the separation
documents that must be prepared for soldiers on retirement, discharge,
release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army.  It also
establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form
214.

7.  Chapter 2 of the separation documents regulation contains item-by-item
instructions for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  The instructions for
Item 29 (Dates of Time Lost During This Period) states that the time lost
as indicated by Defense Finance and Accounting Service agencies will be
verified and subtracted from Item 12c (Net Active Service This Period) if
the time lost was not made good.  If the ETS was adjusted as a result of
lost time and the Soldier served until ETS, the lost time was "made good”.
Lost time is not creditable service for pay, retirement, or veteran's
benefits.  However, the Army preserves a record (even after time is made
up) to explain which service between date of entry on active duty (Item
12a) and separation date (Item 12b) is creditable service.  Time lost after
ETS is non-chargeable time, but it must also be reported to ensure it is
not counted in computation of total creditable service for benefits.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim that she was never AWOL was carefully considered.
 However, the evidence of record confirms her commander reported a change
in her duty status from PDY to AWOL on 20 July 1996 and from AWOL to PDY on
24 July 1996.

2.  The DA Form 4187 duty status change documents on file in the
applicant’s MPRJ confirm she was AWOL for four days from 20 through 23 July
1996.  Absent any independent evidence to repute the duty status changes on
file, the time lost entry in Item 29 of her DD Form 214 appears to be a
correct and valid entry.

3.  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 this requirement.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 1 August 1998, the date of her
separation from active duty.  Therefore, the time for her to file a request
for correction of any error or injustice expired on 31 July 2001.  However,
she failed to 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

___JEA _  __JAM___  ___LMD_  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.




            ____James E. Anderholm____
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050002472                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/10/25                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1996/08/01                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |126.0400                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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