IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 July 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100028150 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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to add military occupational specialty (MOS) 61C2O (Watercraft Engineer) due to completion of on-the-job training. 2. The applicant states he graduated from a 6-week course at the U.S. Naval Support Activity-Saigon Detachment Nhà Bè in March 1968 and served as a Riverine Patrol Boat (PBR) engineer on a combat patrol boat from December 1967 through August 1968. 3. The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214 and diploma for completion of a 6-week course in river patrol boat maintenance conducted by the U.S. Naval Support Activity-Saigon Detachment Nhà Bè, South Vietnam. 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 of the United States in Louisville, Kentucky, on 2 September 1966. He completed basic training at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, and advanced individual training as an amphibious engineer mechanic at Fort Story, Virginia, and was awarded primary MOS 61E1O. He remained at Fort Story for his first duty assignment with the 558th Transportation Company (Marine Maintenance). He was advanced to pay grade E-4 on 19 June 1967 in MOS 61E2O. 3. On 26 September 1967, he was transferred to Vietnam for assignment to the 458th Transportation Company (PBR) – the first PBR unit in the Army – for duty as a senior amphibian engineer. 4. On 11 June 1968, he was assigned as a marine engineer in MOS 61C2O in the same unit. 5. He departed Vietnam on 21 August 1968 for Oakland Army Base, California, where he was honorably released from active duty on 23 August 1968 as an overseas returnee. He completed 1 year, 11 months, and 22 days of active service. Block 23a (Specialty Number and Title) of his DD Form 214 shows his primary MOS as "61E2O AMPHIB ENG MEC" [amphibious engineer mechanic]. 6. A review of the applicant's records failed to show any evidence he was awarded MOS 61C2O and the record is silent as to how he performed in that MOS during the 70 days he was assigned those duties. 7. Army Regulation 350-1 (Army Training) in effect at the time, provided that formal training in MOS 61C1O was 9 weeks and 2 days in duration. 8. Army Regulation 635-5 serves as the authority for the preparation of the DD Form 214. The regulation in effect at the time provided for the entry of only one specialty (MOS) on the DD Form 214. Additionally, the DD Form 214 in effect at the time had space for only one entry. Under today's standards individuals must hold an MOS for at least 1 year before it may be entered on the DD Form 214. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. Although there is insufficient evidence to show the applicant was qualified for award of MOS 61C2O at the time (40 years ago), the regulation governing the preparation of the DD Form 214 only allowed one specialty to be entered on the DD Form 214. Accordingly, his primary MOS was properly entered on the DD Form 214. 2. Inasmuch as there is insufficient evidence to show he was fully qualified for award of MOS 61C2O at the time, there is no basis to award him the MOS at this time. Even if there were evidence to support award of the MOS, there is no basis to add it to his DD Form 214. 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 failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___X___ ___X____ ____X___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 2. The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by him in service to the United States during the Vietnam War. The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms. __________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) AR20100028150 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100028150 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1