RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          21 September 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004101642


      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             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James C. Hise                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Barbara J. Ellis              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Paul M. Smith                 |     |Member               |

      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, in effect, that the primary military
occupational specialty (MOS) listed in Item 16a (Primary Specialty Number
and Title) of his separation document (DD Form 214) be changed from 81A to
81C.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the MOS listed on his DD Form 214 is
in error. He claims the MOS should logically show an advanced level to
reflect time in service.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of Headquarters, U.S. Army Field
Artillery Center and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, Oklahoma, Special Orders Number
276, dated
3 October 1974, in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 27 June 1975.  The application submitted in this case was
received on 9 December 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.  The applicant’s record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army and
entered active duty on 30 June 1972.  He was trained in and awarded MOS 81A

(General Draftsman) on 18 May 1973.  His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel
Qualification Record) contains only the following one entry in Item 6
(Military Occupational Specialties): “P81A10 (General Draftsman) 730518”.
Item 35
(Record of Assignments) shows he served in duty MOS 81A, performing the
principle duty of General Draftsman, at his last duty assignment.  Further,
the
DA Form 2 (Personnel Qualification Record) prepared on him on 7 January
1975 also lists his verified primary MOS as 81A in Item 16 (Primary MOS).

4.  Special Orders 155, dated 4 June 1975, issued by Headquarters, U.S.
Army Field Artillery Center and Fort Sill, authorized the applicant’s
transfer to the Transfer Point for separation processing on 27 June 1975.
The standard name line of these orders listed the applicant’s MOS as 81A10.

5.  On 27 June 1975, the applicant was honorably separated at the
expiration of his term of service.  At the time, he had completed 2 years,
11 months and
28 days of active military service.  The DD Form 214 he was issued upon his
separation contains the entry “81A10 730518 73/05 (160) General Draftsman”
in Item 16a and the applicant authenticated this document with his
signature in Item 29 (Signature of Person Being Separated).

6.  The applicant provides a copy of Headquarters, U.S. Army Field
Artillery Center and Fort Sill, Special Orders Number 276, dated 3 October
1974.  These were MOS action orders.  The MOS awarded lead line appears to
have originally awarded the applicant MOS 81F10, which is modified to read
81C20.  This order was not on file in the applicant’s Official Military
Personnel File and there is no indication that it resulted in a change to
the applicant’s MOS of record.

7.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes the separation
documents that must be prepared for soldiers on retirement, discharge,
release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army. It also
establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form
214.  The instructions for the MOS entry on the DD Form 214 states, in
pertinent part, that the primary specialty from the member’s record will be
entered along all MOSs served in for at least 1 year.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s request for a correction to the MOS listed in his
separation document was carefully considered.  However, the evidence of
record confirms he was trained in, awarded and served in MOS 81A10 as a
general draftsman.  In addition, his 7 January 1975 DA Form 2 and the
special orders assigning him to the transfer point for separation
processing, dated 4 June 1975, both list his primary MOS as 81A10.

2.  The evidence of record also contains a properly constituted DD Form 214
that lists the applicant’s MOS as 81A.  The applicant authenticated this
document with his signature on the date of his separation; thereby
verifying that the information contained in the document, to include the
Item 16a MOS entry, was correct at the time the DD Form 214 was prepared
and issued.  There is no indication the applicant raised any issue
regarding the MOS entry at the time he received and signed the separation
document.

3.  The applicant provides MOS orders indicating he was awarded either MOS
81F10 or 81C20 on 1 October 1974.  However, lacking any evidence of record
confirming this MOS action was implemented, there is an insufficient
evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief.
4.  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 has failed to
submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 27 June 1975.  Therefore, the time for
him to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on
26 June 1978.  However, he did not file within the 3-year statute of
limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to
show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to
timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_JCH ___  _BJE____  _PMS___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




            ____JAMES C. HISE   ___
                    CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004101642                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2004/09/DD                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1975/06/27                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  1021 |100.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]