RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        12 October 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070005258


      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.

|     |Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano          |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Hubert O. Fry                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. William Blakely               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Michael J. Flynn              |     |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 Social Security Account
Number (SSAN) listed in Item 3 (Social Security Number) of his 4 August
1971 separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected; and that all awards to
which he is entitled based on his service in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN)
be added to Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations
and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his service number was listed as
his SSAN on his DD Form 214 because at the time he was drafted, he did not
have a SSAN.

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214, SSAN Card and Social Security
Administration Letter, dated 16 August 2007 in support of his application.


CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an
applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations
if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided
in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a
substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is
granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the
applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are
insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's record shows he was inducted into the Army and entered
active duty on 18 September 1969.  A Record of Induction (DD Form 47)
prepared on the applicant during his induction processing lists the SSAN he
now claims is incorrect.

3.  The military record provided to the Board did not include an Enlisted
Qualification Record (DA Form 20).  The record does include a DA Form 2627
(Record of Proceedings Under Article 15 of the UCMJ), which lists his SSAN
as the number he now claims is incorrect.

4.  The record also shows that during his active duty tenure, the applicant
accrued 309 days of time lost due to being absent without leave (AWOL)
during four separate periods between 26 July 1970 and 4 August 1971.

5.  There is no indication that the applicant attempted to resolve the SSAN
discrepancy while he was serving on active duty.

6.  On 4 August 1971, the applicant was discharged from the Army under the
provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the
service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The DD Form 214 he was issued
contains the SSAN he now claims is incorrect in Item 3.  It also confirms
he completed a total of
1 year and 8 days of creditable active military service and accrued 309
days of time lost due to AWOL.  The separation document also shows the
applicant served in the RVN from 21 February through 26 July 1970.

7.  The applicant provides a Social Security Administration Letter, dated
16 August 2007, which confirms he was issued his SSAN in December 1965 and
it shows this number as the one he now claims is correct.  He also provides
a copy of his SSAN Card, which also lists the SSAN he now claims is
correct.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part,
for award of the Vietnam Service Medal.  This medal is awarded to all
members of the Armed Forces of the United States for qualifying service in
Vietnam after
3 July 1965 through 28 March 1973.  This regulaiton also provides that a
bronze service star is authorized with this award for each campaign a
member is credited with participating in while serving in the RVN.

9.  Table B-1 of the awards regulation contains a list of RVN campaigns.
It shows that during the applicant's tenure of assignment in the RVN,
participation credit was granted for the Vietnam Winter-Spring 1970,
Sanctuary Counteroffensive, and Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VII
campaigns.

10.  Department of the Army General Order Number 8, dated in 1974,
authorized the award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm
Unit Citation to all personnel assigned to the RVN from 8 February 1962
through 28 March 1973.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that the SSAN listed in Item 3 of his DD
Form 214 is incorrect has been carefully considered.  However, the evidence
of record confirms the SSAN shown on the applicant's DD Forms 214 is
identical to the SSAN recorded on his DD Form 47 (Induction Record) and on
the available documents and orders on file in the record, which includes
induction orders and an Article 15 record.

2.  The Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records for
historical purposes, and normally would not change a SSAN under which a
member performed military service because the military records should
reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the
records were created and under which the military service was performed.

3.  Although the Social Security Administration indicates that the
applicant has had the same SSAN on file in the records since December 1965,
the SSAN they indicate is correct was never a part of any of the
applicant's military records.  As a result, absent any evidence that the
applicant attempted to resolve the SSAN issue while he was serving on
active duty, it would not be appropriate to change the SSAN listed in his
military records, which is the one under which he entered military service,
served and was discharge, at this late date.

4.  This Report of Proceedings, along with the application and supporting
documents submitted by the applicant will be filed in his Official Military
Personnel File (OMPF) to provide clarity to any confusion that might arise
regarding his different SSANs.  Filing the Board’s decisional document will
also guarantee the historical accuracy of the applicant’s military record
regarding the SSAN under which he served and document the SSAN he now
claims is correct.

5.  The evidence of record does show the applicant served in the RVN from
21 February through 26 July 1970, and that based on his service and
campaign participation, he is entitled to the Vietnam Service Medal with 3
bronze service stars and the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.
Therefore, it would be appropriate to add these awards to his record at
this time.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

___HOF _  __WB  __  __MJF__  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board
recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual
concerned be corrected by amending Item 24 of his 4 August 1971 DD Form 214
by adding the Vietnam Service Medal with 3 bronze service stars and
Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation; and by
providing him a correction to his separation document that includes these
awards.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
correction of his Social Security Account Number.




                                  _____Hubert O. Fry_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070005258                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/10/23                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |UOTHC                                   |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1971/08/04                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200 C10                          |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |In Lieu of C-M                          |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT PARTIAL                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.  1021 |100.0000                                |
|2.  46                  |107.0000                                |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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