RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 25 MARCH 2004
DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003093530
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. Luther L. Santiful | |Chairperson |
| |Mr. Lester Echols | |Member |
| |Mr. Thomas E. O'Shaughnessy, Jr. | |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).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that item 17 (current active service other than
by induction) on his June 1969 separation document be corrected to show
that he was ordered to active duty and not ACDUTRA (active duty for
training).
2. The applicant states, in effect, that his unit was ordered to active
duty and that an attempt was made to correct the item in 1969 but no action
was ever taken. He states the error is preventing him from obtaining
Department of Veterans Affairs benefits.
3. The applicant provides a copy of his separation document, a copy of the
1969 request to have item 17 corrected, and a copy of an April 2003 letter
from the Department of Veterans Affairs stating they cannot verify his
“active duty (not active duty for training) service….”
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of an error which occurred on 8
June 1969. The application submitted in this case is dated 24 June 2003.
2. 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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.
3. Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant enlisted in
the Army National Guard in January 1966. He was assigned as a member of
the 650th Medical Detachment (Dental Service).
4. Letter orders and unit orders, issued on 23 April 1968, by the 650th
Medical Detachment indicate that the applicant’s unit was ordered to active
duty “by direction of the President” for a period of 24 months commencing
on 13 May 1968.
5. The applicant, as part of that unit activation order, entered active
duty on
13 May 1968. He served in Vietnam with his unit between August 1968 and
June 1969. He was released from active duty at Fort Lewis, Washington on
8 June 1969 under a provision, which permitted individuals who were ordered
to active duty, to be released from active duty in order to attend school,
after returning from Vietnam. Item 17 of the applicant’s separation
document, however, incorrectly indicated that he had been “ordered to
ACDUTRA for 24 months” rather than “ordered to ACDU for 24 months.” The
error on his separation document is apparently affecting his entitlement to
some Department of Veterans Affairs benefits.
6. In August 1969, after the applicant’s separation document had already
been issued, an official at Fort Lewis, Washington requested that item 17
be corrected. There is no indication a correction was ever made.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
The evidence confirms that the applicant was ordered to active duty for a
period of 24 months. He was not ordered to active duty for training as his
June 1969 separation document indicates. The error was recognized shortly
after his separation, however, no action was ever taken to correct the
error.
BOARD VOTE:
__LLS __ ___LE _ ___TEO _ GRANT RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
a recommendation for relief and to excuse failure to timely file. As a
result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the
individual concerned be corrected by showing in item 17 of his 8 June 1969
separation document that he was ordered to active duty for a period of 24
months vice ordered to ACDUTRA.
___ Luther L. Santiful______
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR2003093530 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON |YYYYMMDD |
|DATE BOARDED |20040325 |
|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. | |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002109C070206
The applicant states, in effect, that Item 17, of the DD Form 214, states that he was, "Ordered to ACDUTRA (active duty for training) for 18 months and 1 day." He requests that his DD Form 214 be corrected to show that he was ordered to active duty for 18 months and 1 day. The applicant was release from active duty for training on 26 September 1965 and was returned to state control as a member of the Oregon Army National Guard to complete his remaining service obligation of 5 years and 6 months.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9509464C070209
His activation orders, issued by the XX United States Army Corps, specifically state that he was being ordered to active duty for the purpose of training (ACDUTRA). Again the orders specifically state the applicant was being ordered to active duty for the purpose of training. It is clear, based on the various documents which ordered the applicant to active duty, that his final period of active service, 28 September 1968 through 27 April 1969, was not for the purpose of training but rather...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011761
The applicant's military service records contain a DD Form 214, with an effective date of 20 October 1969. The applicant contends, in effect, that his DD Form 214, with an effective date of 20 October 1969, should be corrected to show he was ordered to active duty rather than ordered to active duty for training. However, the evidence of record shows that this service is not accurately recorded on the applicant's DD Form 214, with an effective date of 20 October 1969.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082782C070215
Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant enlisted in the United States Army Reserve for a period of 6 years on 7 May 1964. Although the applicant was in fact a member of the United States Army Reserve at the time he was ordered to active duty in 1968, he was not ordered to active duty for training purposes as his 1969 separation document indicates. While the evidence does not indicate that the applicant was integrated into the Regular Army when he was order to active...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015720
This publication shows that the 101st Airborne Division Artillery and the 650th Transportation Detachment, during the time of the applicant's assignment, were cited in Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 43, dated 1970, for award of the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and in DAGO Number 48, dated 1971, for award of the RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation. The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show his award of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010031C080213
In a second application, the applicant requests that item 14 ( District, Area Command or Corps to Which Reservist Transferred) (sic, but probably meaning item 25 (Education and Training Completed)) of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to include his training; that item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) be corrected to show the Purple Heart, the ARCOM with V...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017822
The applicant requests, in effect, that item 17a (Current Active Service Other than by Induction) of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) that was issued on 24 September 1969 be corrected to show that he was ordered to active duty (AD) instead of ordered to active duty for training (ACDUTRA). The applicant essentially states that his DD Form 214 that was issued on 24 September 1969, which will simply be referred to as his second DD Form 214...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007820
In effect, his Delaware Army National Guard (DEARNG) unit was activated for about 9 months during the Wilmington Riot of 1968. The applicant's Army military service record shows as a member of the DEARNG he was ordered to active duty for training (ACDUTRA) and entered active duty on 24 October 1966. He or she will only receive a DD Form 220 (Active Duty Report); and d. RC Soldiers completing initial ADT that results in the award of an MOS even when the active duty period was less than 90 days.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014340
The applicant requests that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show his awards of the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) and Air Medal and his completion of the Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Academy. His DD Form 214 issued at the time of his REFRAD shows that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, and Vietnam Campaign Medal. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080013644
The applicant states, in effect, that his military service records show his active duty service, but his discharge document does not show all of his active service. This document also shows the VA determined the applicants period of service in the USAR was from 26 August 1963 through 25 February 1964, for 6 months and 10 days of active duty for training purposes only. The instructions for block a, line 3, state self explanatory. b. Paragraph 52 (Item 24, block b) state to enter the...