RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  24 April 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060009887 


	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.


X

	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, reconsideration of his previous application requesting that Item 23a (Specialty Number & Title) of his 27 August 1970 separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected to show his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) as 13B (Cannon Crewmember) and that Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) be corrected to show his entitlement to marksmanship qualification badges based on his qualification with the M-16 automatic rifle, and the .38 and .45 caliber pistols.

2.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application:  Congressional Inquiry; Self-Authored Statement; Battery D, 2nd Battalion (Airmobile), 320th Artillery, Unit Orders Number (#) 70, dated 23 December 1969; and Headquarters, United States Army Personnel Center, Special Orders #239, dated 27 August 1970.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20050014383 on 8 June 2006.

2.  During the original consideration of this case, the Board determined there were no orders, Diploma, or Training Certificate on file in the applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) to indicate he was ever trained in or awarded MOS 13B.  Further, the Board found no orders or other documents showing that he ever qualified with the M-16 automatic rifle or the .38 and .45 caliber pistols. As a result, it concluded there was insufficient evidence to support awarding the applicant the MOS 13B and marksman qualification badges for qualification with the M-16 Rifle and the .38 and .45 caliber pistols.

3.  The applicant’s record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 5 September 1968.  His Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he attended advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, from 28 July through 28 August 1969, and that he successfully completed the MOS 70A (General Clerk) course.  Upon his successful completion of AIT, he was awarded MOS 70A on 14 August 1969.


4.  Item 22 (Military Occupational Specialties) of the applicant's DA Form 20 confirms he was awarded MOS 70A (General Clerk) on 14 August 1969 and that he was subsequently awarded MOS 71H (Personnel Specialist), a progression MOS in the clerical field, on 23 December 1969.  Item 22 gives no indication that he was ever awarded an artillery MOS during his active duty tenure; and Item 38 (Record of Assignments) shows that subsequent to his completion of AIT, he was assigned to MOS 70A positions and served as a clerk at all of his active duty assignments at both Fort Rucker, Alabama and in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).

5.  Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) shows the applicant was promoted to specialist four (SP4), effective 23 December 1969.  His MPRJ contains Battery D, 2nd Battalion, 320th Artillery, 101st Airborne Division, Unit Orders Number 70, dated 23 December 1969.  The standard name line of these orders shows the applicant's MOS as 13B20 and his unit of assignment as Battery D,
2nd Battalion, 320th Artillery.  

6.  The applicant's MPRJ also contains Headquarters, 101st Airborne Division (Airmobile) Special Orders Number 156, dated 5 June 1970.  These orders reduced the applicant to private first class (PFC) as a result of his acceptance of non-judicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), effective 3 April 1970.  The standard name line of these orders show lists the applicant's MOS as 13A and his unit of assignment as Battery D, 2nd Battalion (Airmobile), 320th Artillery.

7.  The applicant's MPRJ further contains Headquarters, United States Army Personnel Center, Fort Lewis, Washington, Special Orders Number 239, dated 27 August 1970.  These orders authorized the applicant's release from active duty and transfer to the United States Army Reserve (USAR).  The standard name line of these orders also lists the applicant's MOS as 13B. 

8.  The applicant's MPRJ is void of any orders awarding him the MOS 13B, or any other artillery MOS.  In addition, there are no school diplomas or certificates on file that indicate the applicant was ever trained in an artillery MOS.  His MPRJ is also void of any orders or other documents that show he ever qualified with the M-16 Rifle or the .38 and .45 caliber pistols.

9.  On 27 August 1970, the applicant was honorably separated after completing 
1 year, 11 months, and 23 days of active military service.  The DD Form 214 he was issued contains the entry 71H (Personnel Specialist) in Item 23a.  It also shows that during his active duty tenure, he earned the following awards:  National Defense Service Medal; Vietnam Service Medal; Vietnam Campaign Medal; 1 Overseas Service Bar; and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-14) Bar.  Item 25 (Education and Training Completed) contains an entry confirming his successful completion of the MOS 70A General Clerk Course at Fort Jackson, South Carolina.  The applicant authenticated this document with his signature in Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Transferred or Discharged) on the date of his separation.  

10.  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 and contains item-by-item instructions for the DD Form 214.  The instructions contained in the version of the regulation in effect at the time of the applicant's separation stated that the primary MOS code, number, and title would be entered in Item 23a.  The instructions also stated, in pertinent part, that service schools successfully completed would be entered in Item 25, and that the primary source for MOS and school entries would be the DA Form 20.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that his record should be corrected to show he held the MOS 13B was carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.  

2.  Although the evidence of record does contain orders that list the applicant's MOS as 13B or 13A in the standard name line, there are no orders or other documents on file that confirm the applicant was ever trained in or awarded an artillery MOS, or that he ever completed an artillery MOS producing course during his active duty tenure.  His DA Form 20 contains no entries in Item 22 or Item 27 that indicate he was ever awarded an artillery MOS or that he ever completed an MOS producing course for a series 13 MOS.  Item 22 does contain entries confirming he was initially awarded MOS 70A on 14 August 1969 and that he was awarded MOS 71H, a clerical progression MOS, on 23 December 1969.  Item 27 also contains an entry confirming he successfully completed the MOS 70A General Clerk Course at Fort Jackson in 1969.  

3.  The applicant's DA Form 20 contains no entries indicating he ever worked in a series 13 position or that he was ever awarded a series 13 MOS as either a primary, secondary, or additional MOS during his active duty tenure.  Further, his 
DD Form 214 confirms, in Item 23a, that he held the MOS 71H on the date of his separation, and the applicant authenticated this document with his signature on 
the date of his separation.  His signature, in effect, was his verification that the information contained on the separation document, to include the Item 23a entry, was correct at the time the DD Form 214 was prepared and issued.  

4.  The veracity of the applicant's claim that he worked in MOS 13B is not in question; however, there is no evidence of record showing that he was ever assigned to a valid series 13 position, or that he was ever trained in or awarded a 
series 13 MOS, while serving on active duty.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to support granting this portion of the requested relief.  

5.  The applicant's contention that he qualified with the M-16 Rifle and the .38 and .45 caliber pistols was also carefully considered.  However, his MPRJ is void of any orders or other documents and his DA Form 20 is void of any entries that show he ever qualified with these weapons.  Additionally, the applicant has failed to provide any documentary evidence to support this claim.  Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting this portion of the requested relief. 

6.  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.

7.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 27 August 1970, the date of his separation. Therefore, the time for him to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 26 August 1973.  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

___X_  __X__  __XX __  DENY APPLICATION



BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20050014383, dated 8 June 2006.




_____X_____
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060009887
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
2007/04/24
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
1970/08/27
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR635-200 . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON
Chapter 5
BOARD DECISION
Deny
REVIEW AUTHORITY
Mr. Schwartz
ISSUES         1.
107
2.
100
3
110
4.

5.

6.