IN THE CASE OF:	  

	BOARD DATE:	  13 May 2008

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070018554 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his Social Security Account Number (SSAN) and Date of Birth (DOB); and correction of his record to show Vietnam service, all awards to which he is entitled and to document his disability. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his overseas service was never added to his separation document (DD Form 214), and that he has received a disability rating from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).  He also states that the fifth digit of his SSAN is 0 and not 8 as is indicated on his separation document 
(DD Form 214).  

3.  The applicant provides a SSAN Card 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.  On 5 December 1985, the applicant was issued a correction to his DD Form 214 (DD Form 215) that corrected Item 22c (Foreign Service) to show he completed 1 year and 2 days of overseas service, and Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) by adding the RVN Campaign Medal with Device 1960, Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) with 4 bronze service stars, Meritorious Unit Emblem 1st Oak Leaf Cluster, and RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal 1st Class Unit Citation Badge to the list of awards contained on his DD Form 214.  On 21 July 1999, this Board rendered a decision that confirmed the 5 December 1985 DD Form 215 satisfied the applicant's request to document his RVN service and all awards to which he was entitled.  As a result, these issues will not be discussed further in this Record of Proceedings.  

3.  The applicant's record shows that on 21 March 1968, he was inducted into the Army of the United States and entered active duty.  On 26 March 1968, he was honorably discharged for the purpose of enlistment in the Regular Army (RA).  The DD Form 214 he was issued at this time lists his SSAN with the number 8 as the fifth digit in Item 3 (Social Security Number) and Item 9 (Date of Birth) lists his DOB as 13 June 1948.  The applicant authenticated this document with is signature in Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Transferred or Discharged).  

4.  On 27 March 1968, the applicant enlisted in the RA for 3 years.  The identification number listed on his enlistment contract was his Service Number, which was the primary ID number used at the time.  His DOB on the enlistment contract is listed as 13 June 1948 in Item 15 (Date of Birth).  

5.  The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) lists his Service Number and SSAN in Item 1 (Name and Service Number).  The SSAN listed lists the number 8 as the fifth digit.  Item 6 (Date of Birth) lists his DOB as 13 June 1948.  

6.  Orders and documents on file in the applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) that contain a SSAN list the number 8 as the fifth digit.  His OMPF is void of any medical documents that indicate he was suffering from a disabling medical condition that would have supported his separation processing through medical channels at the time of his discharge.  

7.  The record also shows that during his active duty tenure, the applicant accrued 411 days of time lost due to being absent without leave (AWOL) during five separate periods between 3 January 1970 and 2 February 1972.  


8.  On 3 March 1972, the applicant was honorably discharged after completing 
2 year, 9 months, and 22 days of creditable active military service and accruing 411 days of time lost due to AWOL.  Item 3 lists the SSAN he now claims is incorrect and uses the number 8 in the fifth digit, and Item 9 (Date of Birth) lists his DOB as 13 June 1948.  The applicant authenticated this document with his signature in Item 32 on the date of his discharge.  

9.  The applicant provides a partially legible SSAN Card that appears to list the number 0 in the fifth character; however, the fifth digit could also be viewed as an 8.  He provides no birth certificate of any other official document with his DOB. 

10.  Army Regulation 635-40 establishes the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating.  Paragraph 3-1 contains guidance on the standards of unfitness because of physical disability.  It states, in pertinent part, that the mere presence of impairment does not, of itself, justify a finding of unfitness because of physical disability. In each case, it is necessary to compare the nature and degree of physical disability present with the requirements of the duties the Soldier reasonably may be expected to perform because of their office, grade, rank, or rating.  

11.  Title 38, United States Code, sections 1110 and 1131, permits the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service.  The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service.  The VA, in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned.  The VA can evaluate a veteran throughout his lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based upon that agency's examinations and findings.  However, these changes do not call into question the application of the fitness standards and the disability ratings assigned by proper military medical authorities during the applicant’s processing through the Army PDES. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that the SSAN and DOB listed on his final 
DD Form 214 are incorrect has been carefully considered.  However, the evidence of record confirms the SSAN and DOB shown on the applicant's DD Forms 214 is identical to the SSAN and DOB recorded on his DA Form 20, and in the available documents and orders on file in his OMPF. 
2.  The Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records for historical purposes, and normally would not change a SSAN or DOB 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.  Although the applicant provides a SSAN Card that appears to list the number 0 as the fifth digit of his SSAN, this number was not used in the SSAN on his military records.  He also provides no official document related to his DOB.  As a result, absent any evidence that the applicant attempted to resolve the SSAN issue while he was serving on active duty or that confirms he used a different DOB than the one listed in his military records, it would not be appropriate to change the SSAN and/or DOB listed in his military records, given these were the ones under which he entered military service, served and was discharged, at this late date.  

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

4.  The applicant's contention that he should have received a disability discharge based on a VA rating he has now received was also considered.  However, although the applicant may now have been granted a disability rating for service connected conditions by the VA, this does not call into question the medical fitness standards used by military medical personnel at the time of his discharge. 

5.  While both the Army and the VA use the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD), not all of the general policy provisions set forth in the VASRD apply to the Army.  The VA may rate any service connected impairment, thus compensating for loss of civilian employment.  It may also award compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned. It can also evaluate a veteran throughout his lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based upon that agency's examinations and findings.  The Army rates only conditions that are determined to be physically unfitting for further military service, thereby compensating the individual for the loss of his or her military career.  As a result, absent any evidence of record that indicates the applicant was suffering from a disabling condition that would have warranted his separation through the Army's PDES at the time of his discharge, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to change his discharge at this time based on his VA disability rating.  

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.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___x ____  ___x____  ___x____  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.




      _________x______________
      	CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20070018554



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20070018554


2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1