RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  
	 

	BOARD DATE:           13 February 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060009737


	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. G. E. Vandenberg

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.

Chairperson

Mr. William F. Crain

Member

Mr. Dale E. DeBruler

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 24 March 1954 DD Form 214 (Report of Separation) be corrected to show he served in the Regular Army (RA) and had one year of foreign service in Korea.

2.  The applicant states his DD Form 214 does not correctly reflect his service component as Regular Army and does not show his total period of service in Korea as one year.  His dog tags indicate service in the RA.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his 24 March 1953 DD Form 214 and Fitzsimmons Army Medical Center Letter Order Number 3-19, dated 26 March 1973, relieving him from active duty and transferring him to the United States Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Retired Reserve). 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which occurred on 1 April 1973, the date he retired.  The application submitted in this case is dated 28 June 2006.

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 records show the applicant was inducted (drafted) and entered active duty on 5 February 1953. 

4.  A DD Form 47 (Record of Induction) shows the applicant was accepted for induction in the Army of the United States (AUS) on 5 February 1953 and was issued the service number US55 xxx xxx.  

5.  A DD Form 4 (Enlisted Record), dated 2 May 1957, shows the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army on 25 March 1954 and lists his service number as RA55 xxx xxx.


6.  Item 38 of the 24 March 1954 DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment in the RA for 3 years.  The form lists his service number as US55 xxx xxx and component as “AUS.”  It lists his period of foreign service as 8 months and 3 days with no country where his foreign service was performed.

7.  The DA Form 24 (Service Record), for the period 5 February 1953 through 1 May 1957, lists the applicant’s service number as RA55 xxx xxx.  It shows he departed the United States on 22 July 1953, arrived in Japan on 8 August 1953 where he remained for three days before departing for Korea.  He served in Korea from 11 August 1953 through 10 July 1954 (11 months).

8.  The records show the applicant had several additional reenlistments with one brief period of inactive service and retired on 31 March 1973, based on longevity. 

9.  At the time of the applicant’s first period of service all personnel who were inducted (i.e. draftees) were designated as members of the Army of the United States (AUS) and their service number started with the prefix "US."  Soldiers who were voluntary enlistees or who reenlisted in the Regular Army were issued a new service number or had their service numbers converted to a service number with the prefix of RA.  

10.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time of the issuance of the 1954 DD Form 214 provided that the entry at item 26 (Foreign and/or Sea Service) would reflect only that period of service that occurred during the period covered by the DD Form 214.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  As an inductee the applicant was a member of the Army of the United States (AUS) and his original service number was properly issued with the US prefix.  At the time he reenlisted, his service number was properly converted to an RA prefix to reflect enlistment in the Regular Army.

2.  The applicant served in Korea from 11 August 1953 through 10 July 1954, (11 months) with 20 days in transit prior to his arrival in Korea.  However, this period of foreign service is split by his reenlistment into the Regular Army on 24 March 1954.  As of the date of his reenlistment he had 8 months and 3 days of foreign and/or sea service.


3.  The 24 March 1954 DD Form 214 was properly completed and, in accordance with regulations in effect at that time, reflects only that period of foreign service (8 months and 3 days) that occurred between 5 February 1953 and 24 March 1954.

4.  There is no error in the preparation of the 24 March 1954 DD Form 214.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 31 March 1973; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 30 March 1976.  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

__WFC     __DED        __HOF__  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.




__Hubert O. Fry, Jr.______
          CHAIRPERSON


INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060009737
SUFFIX

RECON
 
DATE BOARDED
20070213 
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
  . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
100
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.