IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 January 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140007643 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 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) to show his foreign service. 2. The applicant states he served in Vietnam from January to September 1971, but the information was not recorded on his DD Form 214. 3. The applicant provides a DD Form 214. 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 May 1970. 3. His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), which appears to be a partially reconstructed version, does not show service in Vietnam. 4. His available military records include a Standard Form 509 (Clinical Record/Doctor's Progress Notes) that shows he was examined on 14 January 1971 by the 152nd Medical Detachment (Mobile Army) (Dispensary), APO  96492 (Vietnam). 5. He was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 21 March 1973. His DD Form 214 does not show any foreign service in item 22c (Foreign and/or Sea Service) or awards authorized for service in Vietnam, such as the Vietnam Service Medal. 6. Aside from the previously-mentioned Standard Form 509, there is no evidence in the applicant's available records indicating the specific dates of his service in Vietnam. 7. The applicant's Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) Case Report and Directive, dated 14 July 1978, states: "Applicant's files are incomplete. It appears he served in VN [Vietnam], was awarded CIB [Combat Infantryman Badge]. He once attained the grade of E-4. Presume he successfully completed BCT [basic combat training], AIT [advanced individual training] and tour in VN.…Under SDRP [Special Discharge Review Program] the ADRB considered VN service plus probable 24 months of satisfactory service…" The ADRB voted to upgrade his character of service to general under honorable conditions. 8. On or around 14 July 1978, the applicant's DD Form 214 was re-issued upgrading his character of service to under honorable conditions under the Department of Defense SDRP. 9. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separations Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army. It established standardized policy for preparation of the DD Form 214. Instructions for item 22c stated to enter total active duty performed outside the continental limits of the United States for the period covered by the DD Form 214 and the last oversea theater in which the service was performed (e.g., "Foreign and/or Sea Service (U.S. Army Pacific (USARPAC))." 10. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records), paragraph 2-2c, states the ABCMR will decide cases on the evidence of record. It is not an investigative agency. Paragraph 2-9 states the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to reflect his service Vietnam. 2. His complete military records are not available for review, specifically, documentation pertaining to his service in Vietnam. His available military records include a Standard Form 509 that indicates he was in Vietnam on 14 January 1971. However, aside from this document, there is no evidence, such as entries on his DA Form 20 or reassignment orders, indicating the dates of his service in Vietnam. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence on which to base correction of his DD Form 214 to show his service in Vietnam. 3. Based on the foregoing evidence, there is no basis to grant the applicant's requested relief at this time. 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 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) AR20140007643 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140007643 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1