RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 March 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070017022 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. Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano Director Mrs. Nancy L. Amos Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Mr. Frank C. Jones Chairperson Ms. Carmen Duncan Member Mr. Scott W. Faught 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 his records be corrected to show he performed duties as a crew chief. 2. The applicant states that he went to Vietnam in April 1969 as a helicopter repairman, but he did not like working all the hours. He believes it was June when he became a crew chief. 3. The applicant provides no additional evidence. 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 inducted into the Army on 14 August 1968. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 67A (Aircraft Maintenance Apprentice) on or about 3 December 1968. 3. The applicant was assigned to Vietnam and was assigned to the 134th Attack Helicopter Company on 9 April 1969. Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows his duty MOS as 67A10, aircraft maintenance apprentice. He was reassigned to the 134th Aviation Company on 21 May 1969. Item 38 of his DA Form 20 shows his duty MOS with this unit as 67A10, aircraft maintenance apprentice. 4. On 15 September 1969, the applicant was awarded primary MOS 67N (UH-1 Helicopter Repairman). Item 38 of his DA Form 20 shows that on 25 October 1969 his duty MOS changed to 67N20, helicopter repairman. 5. The applicant audited his DA Form 20 on 20 March 1970. 6. The applicant departed Vietnam on 22 March 1970. 7. On 22 March 1970, the applicant was honorably released from active duty. 8. Item 23a (Specialty Number & Title) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows his specialty as 67N20, UH-1 Helicopter Repairman. 9. Army Regulation 635-5 prescribes the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army. It establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214. In pertinent part, it states the primary MOS code number and title would be entered in item 23a. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s DA Form 20 does not show and there is no other evidence of record to show that he performed duties as a crew chief, and he audited his DA Form 20 shortly before he left Vietnam. 2. In addition, the instructions for completing item 23a of the DD Form 214 were to enter the primary MOS code number and title. 3. “UH-1 Helicopter Repairman” is the title of MOS 67N and therefore is the correct entry for item 23a of the applicant’s DD Form 214. “Crew Chief” would have only been the title of a position authorized MOS 67N and therefore would not have been entered on the DD Form 214 in any case. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __fcj___ __cd____ __swf___ 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. ____Frank C. Jones_ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070017022 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED YYYYMMDD TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 100.00 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.