RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            31 MAY 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20050014086


      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. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Thomas Pagan                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John Meixell                  |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Alice Muellerweiss            |     |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 that his records be corrected to reflect his
service in Korea and Vietnam.

2.  The applicant states that his reports of separation (DD Form 214) do
not reflect his service in Korea and Vietnam.  He further states that
during his second enlistment he served 13 months in Korea and then was
transferred to the Canal Zone.  He attended the Jungle Warfare School with
his company and then his company was transferred to Vietnam.  He was only
there for 3 months because he was scheduled to reenlist and his commander
blamed him for something he did not do and busted him, so he did not
reenlist and had to be sent back early for separation.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214s.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 8 October 1965.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 12 September 2005.

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 limitations 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 was inducted on 4 August 1960 and underwent his basic
combat training at Fort Dix, New Jersey.  He completed his advanced
individual training as a heavy weapons infantryman at Fort Riley, Kansas,
and was transferred to Fort Kobbe, Canal Zone, on 28 December 1960.

4.  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 14 September 1961 and
remained in the Canal Zone until he was transferred to Fort Jackson, South
Carolina, for release from active duty on 27 July 1962, due to the
expiration of his term of service.  He had served 1 year, 11 months and 24
days of total active service.

5.  On 8 October 1962, he enlisted in the Regular Army and was transferred
to Korea.  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 12 September 1964 and
remained in Korea until 9 February 1964, when he departed Korea and was
transferred to Fort Davis, Canal Zone on 2 April 1964.  He was promoted to
the pay grade of E-5 on 20 November 1964.

6.  On 17 June 1965, while in the Canal Zone, nonjudicial punishment (NJP)
was imposed against him for disobeying a lawful order of a commissioned
officer.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the rank of corporal,
a forfeiture of pay and restriction.  He did not appeal the punishment.

7.  On 28 June 1965, NJP was imposed against him for failure to report for
guard duty.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-
3 (suspended for 60 days), a forfeiture of pay and restriction.  He did not
appeal the punishment.

8.  On 23 September 1965, he underwent a medical/physical examination at
Fort Davis for the purpose of separation.  He departed the Canal Zone on 4
October 1965 for Fort Jackson, where he was honorably released from active
duty (REFRAD) on 8 October 1965, due to his expiration of term of service.
He had served 3 years and 1 day of active service during his current
enlistment for a total of 4 years, 11 months and 25 days of active service.
 His DD Form 214 issued at the time of his REFRAD shows that he served 1
year, 6 months and 3 days of foreign service in item 24c and that his last
overseas service was in the Canal Zone (CZ).

9.  A review of the available records fails to show that the applicant’s
unit, 4th Battalion, 10th Infantry Regiment ever deployed to or served in
Vietnam.  There is also no indication that the applicant ever served in
Vietnam.

10.  Army Regulation 635-5, serves as the authority for the preparation of
the DD Form 214.  The regulation in effect at the time provided that only
the last overseas tour would be indicated in item 24c.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that he served in Korea has been noted and
found to have merit.  However, his last overseas tour during that
enlistment was in the Canal Zone (CZ) and the applicable regulation in
effect at the time provided that only the last overseas tour would be
designated on the DD Form 214.  Inasmuch as his DD Form 214 indicates that
his last overseas tour was in the CZ, there is no basis to change it to
reflect his service in Korea.
2.  The applicant’s contention that he served in Vietnam has also been
noted and found to be without merit.  The applicant has failed to show
through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of
record, any proof that he or his unit were deployed to Vietnam.
Accordingly there is no basis to add service in Vietnam to his records.

3.  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.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 8 October 1965; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 7 October 1968.  The applicant 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

____TP__  ___JM __  ___AM __  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.




                                  ______Thomas Pagan_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050014086                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060525                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19651008                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, SPN 201                     |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY)                                  |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES                  |189/CORR 214                            |
|1.110.0000              |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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