RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            25 MAY 2004                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003096391

	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. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Ms. Terry Placek		Member	
	Ms. Eloise Prendergast		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	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.  In effect, the applicant requests that his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to delete the time lost shown on that form, thereby correcting his total service to show in excess of 6 months. 

2.  The applicant states that his DD Form 214 was prepared for a discharge date of 20 July 1966.  He did not leave basic [training] until 20 August 1966 because he had to attend a hearing.  He was found not guilty, so the lost time should be added so he can receive VA (Department of Veterans Affairs) benefits and back pay. 

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

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 20 July 1966.  The application submitted in this case is dated           5 November 2002.  

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 Army for three years on 14 January 1966 and was assigned to Fort Polk, Louisiana.  On 2 April 1966 he was assigned to Fort Gordon, Georgia for advanced training.  

4.  The applicant's records contain a request from Fort Gordon to the Army Personnel Services Support Center at Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana that a reconstructed service record be prepared on the applicant, stating that efforts to locate his records were futile, and that temporary service records were initiated on 31 May 1966. 

5.  On 13 April 1966 the applicant requested a hardship discharge.  On 5 July 1966 his request was approved.  

6.  The applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows that he was AWOL (absent without leave) from 2 June 1966 to 16 June 1966.  

7.  The applicant was discharged with an honorable characterization of service on 20 July 1966.  His DD Form 214 shows that he had 5 months and 22 days of service and 15 days of lost time from 2 June 1966 to 16 June 1966.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1. Due to the passage of time the facts and circumstances concerning the applicant’s AWOL are not on file; however, administrative regularity in the preparation of his DD Form 214 showing his time lost is presumed.  There is nothing in the available records or in anything submitted by the applicant to overcome that presumption.

 2.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.   
  
3.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 20 July 1966; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on         19 July 1969.  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 RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__SC ___  __TP ___  __EP  ___  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.

		__ _Samuel Crumpler_____  
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003096391	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20040525	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.