PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:


         BOARD DATE: 07 MARCH 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001061854


         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.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson
Mr. John P. Infante		Member
Ms. Regan K. Smith		Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS :

1. The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

---

2. The applicant requests, in effect, that several items on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected. The applicant states that item 11 (primary specialty number) should reflect 4 years and 3 months; that item 12 should reflect 1 year and 10 months of overseas service; that item 13 (awards) should reflect entitlement to the Army Achievement Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, Army Commendation Medal, Overseas Service Ribbon, Expert Infantryman Badge, and the PLDC (Primary Leadership Development Course) Ribbon, and that item 14 (military education) should reflect completion of PLDC and two courses at St. Mary’s and Big Bend Colleges. He also notes that there are errors in item 15 (post-Vietnam era Veterans’ Educational Assistance Program (VEAP)) and item 16 (high school graduate or equivalent). He submits no evidence in support of his request but notes the corrections are necessary for his children and grandchildren, and to assist him in his medical claim.

3. Records available to the Board indicate the applicant entered active duty on
4 March 1984. His records indicate that at the time he entered active duty he had only 11 years of formal education. He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and was awarded specialty 11B (infantryman) effective 8 June 1984.

4. According to item 5 (oversea service) on his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record), he arrived in Germany on 24 June 1984. While in Germany he completed at least two BSEP (Basic Skills Education Program) Communication Courses, which were hosted by Big Bend Community College and accomplished after duty hours over the course of several weeks. Documents contained in his Educational Development Record (DA Form 669) also indicate that he was enrolled in a High School Completion Program sponsored by Big Bend Community College. While there is no specific record confirming completion of a high school degree or its equivalent, his DA Form 669 does reflect an education level of high school and item 14 (civilian education/code) on his DA Form 2A (Automated Personnel Qualification Record) indicates he was a high school graduate/code E. Army Regulation 680-29 indicates that code E reflects “High School graduate, regardless of number of years completed.” The applicant’s DA Form 2A was last printed in May 1988. There is no mention of St. Mary’s College in the applicant’s record.

5. The applicant returned to the United States on 14 December 1985 after serving 1 year, 5 months, and 21 days in Germany.

6. On 28 March 1988 the applicant arrived in Korea. By May 1988 his commander had initiated a local bar to reenlistment and on 17 May 1988 the applicant submitted a request to be administratively separated from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 16.

7. His request was approved and on 21 June 1988 he departed Korea enroute to the Army Transition Point at Oakland Army Base for separation processing. He was in Korea for a total of 2 months and 24 days.

8. On 22 June 1988 the applicant was discharged from active duty with an honorable characterization of service. Item 11 on his DD Form 214 shows he held his primary specialty for a period of 3 years and that he served only
2 months and 24 days overseas (item 12f). Item 13 shows entitlement to the Army Service Ribbon; item 14 shows no military education; item 15 reflects “no” and item 16 indicates the applicant was a high school graduate or equivalent.

9. In 1990, based on a request from the applicant, officials at the USARPERCEN (U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Center) administratively corrected his 1988 DD Form 214 to show that he had served 1 year, 5 months, and 21 days overseas and that he was entitled to an Overseas Service Ribbon and the Good Conduct Medal. Their administrative corrections were accomplished via the issuance of a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

10. There is no indication in available records that the applicant was ever recommended for, or awarded, an Army Achievement Medal or an Army Commendation Medal. There is no indication that he was ever awarded the Expert Infantryman Badge or the NCO Professional Development Ribbon (which the applicant refers to as the PLDC Ribbon). There is no indication he completed PLDC.

11. Army Regulation 635-5 establishes the policies and provisions for the completion and distribution of the DD Form 214. It notes the following:

a. Item 11 (primary specialty) will reflect the titles of military specialties that an individual served in for at least 1 year. The entry will include the number of years and months served and that for time determination, 16 days or more will count as a month. Time spent in basic and advanced individual training is not counted.

         b. Item 12f (foreign service) will reflect the total amount of foreign service completed during the period of service captured on the DD Form 214.

         c. Item 13 (awards) should list awards and decorations for all periods of service.

         d. Item 14 (military education) reflects formal in-service (full-time attendance) training course successfully completed during the period of service covered by the DD Form 214. The information is intended to assist the soldier in job placement and counseling.
         e. Item 15 (VEAP contributions). The VEAP was an educational incentive program offered to individuals who enlisted between 1 January 1977 and
30 June 1985. The program was designed for the post-Vietnam era soldier as a means of establishing a fund to support their educational objectives following their military service. For every dollar contributed by a soldier, the government matched with a two-dollar contribution to the individual's VEAP account. Participation in the VEAP was a voluntary option and was replaced, in July 1985, by the Montgomery GI Bill and the Army College Fund Program. If a soldier contributed to VEAP and did not get money back, “yes” is marked. If the soldier enlisted contributed to VEAP, and received their money back, “no” is marked. While there is no indication the applicant ever contributed to VEAP his DA Form 669 does indicate that he was provided a “VEAP Refund Form” on 6 April 1987. There were no financial records available to the Board.

         f. Item 16 (high school graduate or equivalent) is self-explanatory.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The applicant was awarded his primary specialty (11B-infantryman) on
8 June 1984 and served in that specialty for the duration of his enlistment, a period of 4 years and 14 days. Item 11 should reflect 4 years; vice the 3 years currently reflect on his DD Form 214.

2. The evidence confirms the applicant served a total of 1 year, 8 months, and
15 days overseas during his period of military service between 1984 and 1988. It appears that when officials at the USARPERCEN administratively corrected his DD Form 214 in 1990 they only counted his service in Germany and did not include his service in Korea. Item 12f should be corrected to reflect 1 year,
8 months, and 15 days.

3. The applicant’s records were corrected to reflect award of the Overseas Service Ribbon and the Army Good Conduct Medal in 1990. As such no additional action is required on those two awards. However, there is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any that he was ever awarded the Army Achievement Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, the Expert Infantryman Badge, or the NCO Professional Development Ribbon.

4. There is no evidence the applicant completed PLDC. Additionally, his completion of courses at Big Bend Community College would have been considered “civilian education.” Even if they were to be considered as “military education” they were not in a “full-time attendance” format and as such would not have been included in item 14 on his DD Form 214. Had there been evidence of courses completed at St. Mary’s College, the same rules would have applied.

5. Although there is no evidence that the applicant ever contributed to the VEAP, his records do indicate that he was provided a refund form in 1987. In the absence of more conclusive evidence that the applicant did contribute and that he did not receive a refund of his contributions, the Board presumes regularity and concludes that the information in item 15 on his DD Form 214 is correct.

6. The applicant’s education record indicates that he was enrolled in a high school completion program and that he was a high school graduate. Additionally, the Board notes that item 14 (civilian education) on his DA Form 2A indicates that he had a high school diploma at the time of his separation. Once again, in the absence of more compelling evidence that the entry is erroneous, the Board presumes regularity.

7. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected:

a. by showing in item 11 on the applicant’s 1988 DD Form 214 that he held his primary specialty for 4 years, vice 3 years; and

b. by correcting item 12f on the form to show he served a total of 1 year,
8 months, and 15 days overseas.

2. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:

__RVO__ __JPI ___ __RKS__ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001061854
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20020307
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	110.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.