RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           23 November 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004103616


      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. Fred Eichorn                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Robert J. Osborn              |     |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 his record be corrected to show
his secondary military occupational specialty (SMOS) of 11B (Light Weapons
Infantryman) as his primary military occupational specialty (PMOS) and his
PMOS of 43E (Parachute Rigger) as his SMOS.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he served in combat in the
Republic of Vietnam (RVN) and Cambodia.  He claims that while serving in
the RVN, he performed duties as an 11B, which should be his PMOS.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his
application:  Director, United States Armed Services Center for Unit
Records Research , Springfield, Virginia Letter, dated 10 April 2003; 1967
and 1969 Separation Documents (DD Forms 214); Correction to Separation
Document (DD Form 215, dated 7 September 2000; United States Military
Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV) Certificate of Achievement.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 24 June 1969.  The application submitted in this case was
received on 26 February 2004.

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.  On 13 June 2000, the Board considered an application from the applicant
requesting a correction to his DD Form 214 and award of the Combat
Infantryman Badge (CIB).  Incorporated herein by reference are military
records that were summarized in this previous consideration by the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number
AR1999025704, on 13 June 2000.
4.  The applicant’s record shows that he initially enlisted in the Army and
entered active duty on 19 October 1967.  Upon completion of training, he
was awarded the PMOS of 43E (Parachute Rigger) and the SMOS of 11B
(Infantryman).  On 18 October 1967, the applicant was honorably discharged
for the purpose of immediate reenlistment after completing 11 months and 2
days of active military service; and on 19 October 1967, he reenlisted for
a period of 3 years.

5.  The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) confirms, in
Item 22 (Military Occupational Specialties), that the applicant held the
PMOS of 43E and the SMOS of 11B.  Item 31 (Foreign Service) shows the
applicant completed overseas tours of duty in Germany and Okinawa.  Item 38
(Record of Assignments) shows the applicant was assigned to duties in MOS
43E at each of the units to which he was assigned subsequent to completing
training.  Specifically, during his assignment to Headquarters and
Headquarters Company, 1st Special Forces Group, Airborne, 1st Special
Forces, United States Army Pacific (HHC, 1st SFG Abn, 1st SF, USARPAC) from
3 March through 16 may 196, he was assigned a duty military occupational
specialty (DMOS) of 43E and performed duties as a parachute packer.

6.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 shows
the applicant earned the National Defense Service Medal, Parachutist Badge,
Expert Qualification Badge with Machine Gun and Rifle (M-16) Bars and
Marksman Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14).  No RVN service
medals/ribbons are included in this list of authorized awards.

7.  On 24 June 1969, the applicant was honorably discharged after
completing
2 years, 7 months and 7 days of active military service.  The DD Form 214
he was issued confirms he held the PMOS 43E and he earned the National
Defense Service Medal, Parachutist Badge, Expert Qualification Badge with
Machine Gun and Rifle (M-16) Bars and Marksman Qualification Badge with
Rifle Bar (M-14) during his active duty tenure.  He authenticated this
document with his signature in Item 32 (Signature of Person Being
Transferred or Discharged).

8.  The applicant provides a letter from the Director, United States Armed
Services Center for Unit Records Research, dated 10 April 2003.  This
letter is a response to a Member of Congress who had made an inquiry on
behalf the applicant regarding the applicant’s Post Traumatic Stress
Disorder (PTSD) claim. The letter provides casualty reports that indicate
an officer was killed in Cambodia and another officer was wounded while
participating in a fire fight on 24 April 1969.  No information regarding
unit assignments was provided with the letter.

9.  The applicant also provides a MACV Certificate of Achievement, which
recognizes him for meritorious service from December 1968 through July 1969
in support of the RVN struggle against worldwide communism.  During its 13
June 2000 review of the applicant’s previous requests, the Board concluded
this Certificate lacked credibility in that it addressed him as a sergeant,
a rank he never attained, and covered a time period that was incompatible
with the period of his service.

10.  Army Regulation 614-200 (Enlisted Assignments and Utilization
Management) prescribes the reporting, selection, assignment, and
utilization of Active Army enlisted personnel.  Chapter 3 contains guidance
on reclassification.  It states, in pertinent part, that an MOS, especially
the PMOS, represents significant time and effort, both to the Army and the
soldier.  The needs of the Army will be the overriding factor in
reclassification actions.  It further specifies that soldiers will be
reclassified only for specific mandatory reasons.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s request for a change to his PMOS and SMOS based on his
combat service and the supporting documents he provided were carefully
considered.  However, the evidence of record confirms he was assigned a
DMOS of 43E at every active duty unit he served with.  The record provides
no indication that he was ever assigned to a DMOS of 11B to perform
infantryman duties.  Specifically, his record shows that while assigned to
HHC, 1st SFG Abn, 1st SF, USARPAC, he was assigned the DMOS 43E, to perform
duties as a parachute packer.

2.  The supporting documents provided by the applicant provide no specific
evidence confirming that the applicant served in combat as an infantryman,
in DMOS 11B.  Regarding the MACV Certificate he provides, the same
inconsistencies addressed by the Board panel in case number AR1999025704
still exist.  As a result, absent any evidence of record to corroborate the
information contained in these supporting documents, they are not found to
be sufficiently convincing to support the applicant’s claims.

3.  Finally, the applicant’s 24 June 1969 DD Form 214 lists his PMOS as 43E
and no RVN service ribbons/medals are included in the list of authorized
awards.  He authenticated this document with his signature, thereby
verifying that the information it contained, to include his MOS and awards,
was correct at the time the document was prepared and issued.  As a result,
there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support a change to his PMOS
at this time.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 24 June 1969.  Therefore, the time for
him to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on
23 June 1972.  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

___RJO_  ___FE___  ___JTM _  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.




            ____Fred Eichorn_______
                    CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004103616                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2004/11/23                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1969/06/24                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Hardship Discharge                      |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  1021 |100.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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