RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         12 September 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060002592


      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. Allen L. Raub                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Linda M. Barker               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Qawley A. Sabree              |     |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 separation document (DD
Form 214) be corrected to show he completed a total of 2 years, 7 months,
and 19 days of active military service.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that there are discrepancies between
the date of induction, date of discharge, and his total active military
service, which will impact his Federal civilian service retirement.  He
claims that according to Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), his
total service should be
2 years, 7 months, and 19 days of active military service.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his
application:  DD Form 214; Estimated Earnings During Military Service (DFAS-
IN RI 20-97); Military Deposit Worksheet (OPM Form 1514); Request
Pertaining to Military Records (SF 180); Report of Medical Examination (SF
88); and Letter to Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), dated 21
June 2005.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 23 September 1971, the date of his separation from active
duty.  The application submitted in this case is dated 9 February 2006.

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 Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains a
Report of Medical Examination (SF 88) that confirms the applicant completed
his induction physical examination on 12 January 1970.

4.  The applicant's MPRJ also contains a Record of Induction (DD Form 47)
that confirms the applicant was inducted into the Army of the Untied States
(AUS), and entered active duty on 5 February 1970.


5.  Armed Forces Examining and Entrance Station (AFEES), El Paso, Texas,
Special Orders (SO) Number (#) 26, dated 5 February 1970, authorized the
applicant's induction into the AUS, in the grade of private/E-1 (PV1), on
5 February 1970.  These orders indicated the applicant's active duty
commitment was 24 months, and it directed his assignment to the United
States Army Reception Station, Fort Ord, California, with a report date of
5 February 1970.

6.  The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows, in
Item 11 (Enlisted, Inducted, Reenlisted, Extended, and/or Ordered to Active
Duty), that the effective date of his induction and entry on active duty
was
5 February 1970.  It also shows the length of his service commitment was
2 years, and the expiration of his term of service (ETS) was established as

4 February 1972.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) confirms he reported to
active duty at the United States Army Reception Station, Fort Ord,
California,
on 5 February 1970.

7.  On 23 September 1971, the applicant was honorably separated under the
provisions of chapter 5, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of Overseas
Returnee.  Item 10c (Date Inducted) of the DD Form 214 he was issued at the
time contains an entry that indicates he was inducted on 5 February 1969.
Item 11d (Effective Date) contains an entry showing he was released from
active duty on 23 September 1971, and Item 22a (1) (Net Service This
Period) contains an entry that indicates he completed a total of 1 year, 7
months, and 19 days of active military service during the period covered by
the DD Form 214.

8.  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.

9.  The separation documents regulation in effect at the time stipulated
that the DA Form 20 and all other available records and orders would be
used as the source documents in the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It
also contained
item-by-item instructions for the DD Form 214.  The instructions for Item
10c stated that the date the individual was inducted (which is the same
date he entered active duty) would be entered in this item.  The
instructions for Item 11d stated that the actual date separation was
accomplished would be entered in this item.  The instructions for Item 22a
(1) stated, in pertinent part, that total service completed between the
date entered in Item 10c and the date in Item 11d would be entered in this
item.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contends that there are discrepancies between the date
of induction, date of discharge, and total military service entered on his
DD Form 214, issued on 23 September 1971,  and that his record should be
corrected to show he completed 2 years, 7 months, and 19 days of active
military service.  The supporting documents he submitted were carefully
considered, however, while there are discrepancies in the dates entered in
the DD Form 214 items in question, they do not support a change to the
total amount of active duty service he actually completed.

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant completed his pre-
induction physical examination on 10 January 1970, which confirms he could
not have been inducted and/or entered active duty in 1969.  It also
contains orders and documents that confirm he was actually inducted into
the AUS and entered active duty at Fort Ord, California on 5 February 1970,
not 5 February 1969, as is listed on his separation document.  This is
evidenced by the DD Form 47 and the Induction and Active Duty Orders
prepared at the AFEES, El Paso, Texas; and by entries on his DA Form 20.

3.  It is clear that an administrative error was made in the preparation of
the applicant's DD Form 214, which resulted in the incorrect induction date
being entered in Item 10c.  However, the evidence confirms that based on
the date he was actually inducted, which was 5 February 1970, and the date
of his separation, which was 23 September 1971, the total active military
service he completed was in fact 1 year, 7 months, and 19 days, as is
currently entered in Item 22a (1) of his separation document.  As a result,
there is no error or injustice related to the total of active duty service
documented on his DD Form 214.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration related to the total amount of active
duty service he completed on 23 September 1971, the date of his separation
from active duty.  Therefore, the time for him to file request for
correction of any error or injustice expired on 22 September 1974.  He
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.

5.  The evidence does show the applicant’s records contain an
administrative error that does not require action by the Board.  Therefore,
his record will be administratively corrected by the Case Management
Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as outlined by the Board in
paragraph 3 of the
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___ALR     __LMB __  __QAS__  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice related to the total amount
of active duty service he completed.  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.

3.  The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the
individual should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the
CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual
concerned by amending his 23 September 1971 DD Form 214 by deleting the
current entry in Item 10c
(Date Inducted) and replacing it with the entry "5 Feb 70"; and by
providing him a correction to his separation document that includes this
change.




                                  ____ Allen L. Raub_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060002592                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2006/09/12                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1971/09/23                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |OS Rtn                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY with Note                          |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.  1021 |100.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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