RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:


         BOARD DATE: 13 JANUARY 2004
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003089835


         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:

Ms. Lana E. McGlynn		Chairperson
Mr. Roger W. Able		Member
Mr. Patrick H. McGann, 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 his service in Korea, Vietnam and with a military police battalion at Fort Dix, New Jersey, be entered on his separation document. He also requests that the military occupational specialty (MOS) shown on his Department of Defense Form 214 (Armed Forces of the Untied States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show 95B4DC vice 95B4O.

2. The applicant states that he served in Korea between August 1968 and August 1969, in Vietnam between August 1969 and August 1970, and with a military police battalion at Fort Dix between August 1970 and April 1972. He states that his MOS should be 95B4DC.

3. The applicant states that the above information was not recorded on his separation document and that the absence of that information on his separation document is interfering with his claim for PTSD (posttraumatic stress disorder).

4. In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of his Army Commendation Medal order and certificate showing his period of service in Vietnam.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1. The applicant is requesting correction of errors which occurred on 12 April 1972. The application submitted in this case is dated 3 April 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 entered active duty on 10 October 1967. He completed training as a military policeman and in April 1968 successfully completed the Sentry Dog Handler Course at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas. Completion of the dog handler course resulted in the applicant being awarded a “D” special qualification identifier (SQI) to his 95B MOS.

4. In June 1968 the applicant was discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment.

5. The applicant’s Department of the Army Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) indicates that the applicant arrived in Korea on 9 November 1968 and departed Korea en route to Vietnam on 12 August 1969. His service in Korea totaled 9 months and 4 days. While in Korea, the applicant performed duties as security guard in his primary MOS (95B2D).

6. The applicant arrived in Vietnam on 13 August 1969 and remained in Vietnam until 9 August 1970, a period of 11 months and 27 days. His period of service in Vietnam is reflected in item 30 (remarks) on his 1972 separation document. His enlisted qualification record indicates that the applicant performed duties in his primary specialty (95B2D and 95B4D) throughout his tour of duty in Vietnam. In January 1970, while assigned to Vietnam, the applicant was promoted to pay grade E-5 and awarded specialty 95B4D.

7. Upon the applicant’s return to the United States, he was assigned to the 532^nd Military Police Company at Fort Dix, New Jersey. Although he did not perform duties as a dog handler while at Fort Dix, he did perform duties as a military policeman (95B) and there is no indication that his SQI of “D” was ever withdrawn from his MOS. The applicant’s assignment to Fort Dix is reflected in item 12 (last duty assignment and major command) on his separation document.

8. On 12 April 1972 the applicant was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service in pay grade E-5. Item 23a (specialty number & title) on his separation document reflects 95B4O. His foreign and/or sea service (item 22c) is reflected as 3 years, five months, and 3 days when in actuality the applicant only had a total of 1 year, 9 months, and 1 day of overseas service between his tour of duty in Korea and his tour of duty in Vietnam.

9. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, provided for entering the inclusive dates of service in Vietnam and for indicating service in Korea merely by a “yes” or “no” entry in the remarks section of the separation document. The provisions for entering such information was announced via a Department of the Army message in December 1971, just months before the applicant was released from active duty.

10. Army Regulation 611-1 states the fifth character of an individual MOS code is a letter or number SQI common to a number of positions and MOSs. At the time of the applicant’s service a SQI of “D” represented qualification as a dog handler. Today Soldiers with special dog handling skills are identified by a variety of ASIs (additional skill identifiers) rather than a single SQI. ASIs are alpha-numeric or numeric-alpha characters.




DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1. The applicant’s service in Vietnam and his final assignment at Fort Dix, New Jersey, are appropriately reflected on his separation document. No additional action is required for those two issues.

2. The evidence shows that the applicant commenced his tour of duty in Korea on 11 November 1968, not in August 1968 as the applicant contends.

3. While the Army Regulation, in effect at the time of the applicant’s separation, provided for the insertion of an individual’s inclusive dates of service in Vietnam in the remarks section, and for a “yes” or “no” entry for service in Korea, in the interest of justice and equity it would be appropriate to enter the applicant’s service in Korea (11 November 1968 – 12 August 1969) in the remarks section rather than merely correcting the entry to show a “yes” entry for service in Korea. Such an entry would serve to clarify the applicant’s overseas service.

4. It is also noted, however, that by entering the inclusive dates of the applicant’s service in Vietnam and Korea, it becomes apparent that an error was made in the completion of item 22c on the applicant’s separation document. The applicant’s overseas service totaled 1 year, 9 months, and 1 day, and not the 3 years, 5 months, and 3 days currently reflected. As such, it would be appropriate, and in the interest of clarity to correct item 22c.

5. The evidence confirms that the applicant’s MOS at the time of his separation was 95B4D and he is entitled to have that information reflected on his separation document in lieu of MOS 95B4O. It appears, based on the fact that the applicant was not utilized in a dog handler position while at Fort Dix, that his SQI was overlooked at the time his separation document was prepared.

BOARD VOTE:

__LEM __ __RWA _ __PHM __ GRANT RELIEF

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION

1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial 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:

a. showing in the remarks section of his separation document that he served in Korea from 11 November 1968 through 12 August 1969;

b. correcting item 22c to show 1 year, 9 months, and 1 day vice 3 years,
5 months, and 3 days; and

c. correcting his MOS to show 95B4D vice 95B4O.

2. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to showing service in Korea commencing in August 1968 and denial of so much of his request that pertains to correcting his MOS on his DD Form 214 to show 95B4DC.




                  ___ Lana E. McGlynn_____
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003089835
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20040113
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.