IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 18 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110010397 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show that he served 20 years, 9 months, and 4 days of active service and that his retired pay be adjusted accordingly. 2. The applicant states he served on active duty from 1 January 1971 to 31 January 1991 and he was retired for length of service. He goes on to state that he had served 20 years, 1 month, and 8 days of service and on the following day (1 February 1991) he was recalled to active duty and served until he was released from active duty (REFRAD) on 27 September 1991 and he was again returned to the Retired Reserve after serving 7 months and 27 days of active service, which should amount to 20 years, 9 months, and 4 days of active service. 3. The applicant provides two letters explaining his application, copies of two DD Forms 214 (Certificates of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), retirement orders and recall to active duty orders, and a letter from the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. 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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant was commissioned as a second lieutenant on 23 December 1970 and was ordered to active duty on 1 January 1971. He was promoted to the rank of major on 1 July 1982 and on 31 January 1991 he was honorably REFRAD and transferred to the Retired List effective 1 February 1991. He had served 20 years and 1 month of active service. 3. On 20 February 1991, orders were published recalling the applicant to active duty effective 1 February 1991 for a period of 365 days. He served until he was REFRAD on 27 September 1991. He had served 7 months and 27 days of active service. 4. Information received from DFAS indicates the applicant is being paid for 20 years, 8 months, and 27days of active service. 5. The applicant’s service computation is as follows: yy mm dd yy mm dd 91 01 31 91 09 27 71 01 01 -91 02 01 = 20 30 = 20 years and 1 month = 7 26 + 1 =20 08 27 6. The advisory opinion received from DFAS indicates the applicant’s pay is based on 20 years, 8 months, and 27 days of active service. It also indicates that the additional 8 days referred to by the applicant was the 8 days of inactive service between the time he was commissioned and the time he entered active duty. 7. The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant and he responded to the effect that he should be credited with the time reflected on both of his DD Forms 214. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s contention that he should be credited with 20 years, 9 months and 4 days of active service has been noted and appears to lack merit. 2. A computation of the applicant’s service as reflected on both of his DD Forms 214 properly reflects a total of 20 years, 8 months, and 27 days of active service. 3. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to show that he completed more service than that which is reflected on his DD Forms 214 there appears to be no basis to grant his request for additional service credit. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 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. _______ _ _______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110010397 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110010397 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1