IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 May 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080015427 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 social security number (SSN) on his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge), with an effective date of 30 June 1967, be changed to read 239-xx-xxxx instead of 234-xx-xxxx. 2. The applicant states he did not notice the error when he filed his discharge papers away in 1967. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, with an effective date of 30 June 1967, in support of his application. 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's military personnel records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 June 1947. He served continuously until his retirement on 30 June 1967. 3. During the period of the applicant's service, Soldiers were identified by means of a military service number. There were no requirements for the entry of an SSN on any documents until 1960. Documents throughout the applicant's official military personnel file (OMPF) identify him by means of a military service number. The Army discontinued using the military service number as an identifier and began using the SSN on 1 July 1969. There are no entries for an SSN in the applicant's OMPF. 4. The applicant was discharged and immediately reenlisted three times during his Army career. His DD Forms 214, with effective dates of 17 June 1950 and 29 June 1958, do not contain entries for an SSN. 5. Item 32 (Remarks) of the applicant's DD Form 214, with an effective date of 29 June 1964, contains the entry "SSAN: 239-xx-xxxx." 6. On 30 June 1967, the applicant was released from active duty and placed on the Retired List the following day. Item 3 (Social Security Number) of the applicant's DD Form 214, with an effective date of 30 June 1967, indicates the applicant's SSAN as 234-**-**** 7. The applicant's DA Form 24 (Service Record) is not in the applicant's OMPF. 8. The applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) does not contain an entry for the applicant's SSN. 9. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), effective 2 March 1960, established the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. In pertinent part, it stated to “Transcribe Social Security Account Number from DA Form 24 in the following manner: SSAN 000-00-0000” for entry in Item 32 of the DD Form 214. 10. Army Regulation 635-5, then in effect, provided, in pertinent part, that the DA Form 20 and the DA Form 24 were among those source documents to be used when preparing the DD Form 214. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. At the time of the applicant's initial enlistment in the Army, military members were identified by the use of a military service number. There is no evidence or official documentation that shows when the applicant applied for an SSN or what SSN he was issued at that time. 2. The evidence in this case provides two SSN's for the applicant; however, there is no corroborating evidence of record and the applicant has submitted no evidence to substantiate which SSN is correct. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to show which of the two SSAN's is or was truly assigned to the applicant. 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 that requirement. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___X____ ___X___ ___X_____ 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. _________X_____________ 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) AR20080015427 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080015427 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1