RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  24 January 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070006287 


	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



Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:




Chairperson



Member



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, correction of his discharge document.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he attended the Cryptography Service School in 1945 and was awarded the MOS 805 (Cryptographic Technician).

3.  The applicant provides no additional documents with 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 military service records are not available to the Board for review.  A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members' records in 1973 and it is believed that the applicant's records were lost or destroyed in that fire.

3.  The National Personnel Record Center reconstructed the applicant’s record and it consists essentially of a copy of his WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation Honorable Discharge), with an effective date of 
27 March 1947, a copy of an undated and uncertified transcript from Crypto Tech in the applicant’s name, and a copy of his WD AGO 21 (Enlistment Record).  These documents were made available for the Board to conduct a review of this case.

4.  The applicant's WD AGO Form 53-55 shows he enlisted and entered active duty in the Army of the United States on 7 December 1945.  Item 30 (Military Occupational Specialty and No.) of the applicant's WD AGO Form 53-55, contains the entry, “(unreadable) Clerk (667)".



5.  The WD AGO Form 53-55 shows that the applicant was assigned to the Base Service Squadron.  He departed the United States on 22 August 1946, arrived in the Asian Pacific Theater of Operations (APTO) on 8 September 1946, and served in the APTO until he returned to the United States on 18 February 1947.  Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) shows that he was awarded the Victory Medal.

6.  War Department Technical Manual (TM) 12-235 (Enlisted Personnel - Discharge and Release from Active Duty), dated January 1945, provided uniform procedures in discharging or releasing personnel from active duty.  The instructions for completing the Report of Separation (WD AGO Form 53-55) states that the form is completed from the Service Record, Soldier's Qualification Card, Immunization Register, and information ascertained by an interview during the discharge.  The instructions for completing Item 30 (Specialty and Number) state the MOS held at time of separation.

7.  Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR.  The regulation provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity.  The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends, in effect, that his discharge document should be corrected to show his MOS in Item 30 as 805 (Cryptographic Technician).

2.  The evidence of record shows that the MOS he held was 667 (Message Center Clerk) and this is recorded in Item 30 of his WD AGO Form 53-55.

3.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant’s MOS at the time of his discharge was 667 (Message Center Clerk).  It is reasonable to conclude that this information was ascertained from (then) available military service records and by an interview with the applicant at the time of his separation processing.  However, the applicant now contends that his MOS at the time of his discharge was 805 (Cryptographic Technician).  While the Board does not question the sincerity of the applicant’s statement, the evidence of record:  the absence of a complete military service record pertaining to the applicant’s military service; the absence of documentary evidence to the contrary concerning the applicant’s MOS at the time of his discharge; and the passage of almost 62 years since the date of his discharge, compel the Board to conclude that Item 30 of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 was correct at the time the document was completed.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to correction of his discharge document.

4.  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.

5.  There is a presumption of administrative regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs.  This presumption can be applied to any review unless there is substantial creditable evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant fails to provide such evidence.  As a result, the applicant's WD AGO Form 53-55 is considered to be correct.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___GP___  __DLL__  ____DWT   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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.




____
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070006287
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20080124
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.