IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  7 October 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080007331 


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 that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to record his overseas service.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he served both in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) and in Turkey but the time served overseas was not recorded on his DD Form 214. 

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a copy of his alleged DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record).

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 served in the Regular Army from 25 June 1963 through 24 June 1967.  He was trained in, awarded, and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 95B (Military Policeman).  He attained the rank of sergeant/E-5.  On
24 June 1967, he was released from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement).  He later served in the USAR.

3.  The applicant's active duty military records show that he served in Turkey from 6 December 1963 through 2 May 1965, a period of 1 year, 4 months, and
26 days.  

4.  There is no evidence that the applicant served in the RVN.  Item 22c (Foreign and/or Sea Service) of the applicant's DD Form 214 erroneously states that his last overseas theater in which he performed service was "USARPAC (U.S. Army Pacific Command)."

5.  On 22 November 1988, while the applicant was serving as a member of a troop program unit (TPU) in the USAR, an informal AR 15-6 investigation was initiated to determine whether he was wearing unauthorized medals and awards, and the possibility that he falsified his active duty military records.

6.  On 5 June 1989, the Chief, Military Awards Branch, U.S. Total Army Personnel Command (USTAPC), provided the applicant's unit a report regarding the authentication of the applicant's medals and awards, etc.  The USTAPC investigation revealed that the applicant had provided falsified documentation for the Distinguished Service Cross, the Silver Star, and the Meritorious Service Medal which were erroneously added to his DA Form 20 (Personnel Qualification Record).  His DA Form 20 was also altered to show he served in the RVN, when he never served in the RVN.  His DA Form 20 was also altered to show he successfully completed airborne, ranger or special forces training; however, he completed none of this training.  The Chief, Military Awards Branch directed that the applicant's unit instruct the applicant to remove the unauthorized items from his uniform and abstain from their wearing in the future.  All the items which were declared invalid were removed from his records.  

7.  On 6 August 1989, the applicant's unit commander initiated action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178, chapter 7-11c, for misconduct – commission of a serious offense.  He initiated action based on the applicant's fabrication of documents and records to wear unauthorized awards and decorations.

8.  On 15 December 1989, the applicant was separated from the USAR for misconduct, with a general discharge, under honorable conditions.  
9.  Army Regulation 635-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel), then in effect, provided for the separation of enlisted personnel of the Army Reserve and Army National Guard.  The regulation, defined misconduct by reason of one or more of the following:  minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and conviction by civil authorities.  The service of a Soldier discharged for reasons indicated in paragraph 7, was normally be characterized as under other than honorable conditions.  If warranted by the Soldier's overall record, a characterization of service of under honorable conditions could be furnished.

10.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), then in effect, prescribed policies and procedures regarding the preparation of separation documents
(DD Forms 214 and 215).  In pertinent part, it directed that the total active duty outside the continental limits of the U.S. for the period covered by the DD Form 214 and the last oversea theater in which service was performed be entered in Item 22c.  Each entry is verified by the individual's service record.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant performed duty in Turkey for 1 year, 4 months, and 26 days.  Turkey was considered to be the African-Middle Eastern Area (AMEA).  Therefore, his DD Form 214, Item 22c, should be corrected to show "AMEA 1 year, 4 months, and 26 days." 

2.  The applicant did not serve in the RVN.  An informal Article 15-6 investigation determined that the applicant falsified and altered his DA Form 20 and other documents in his official record by including service in the RVN which he did not perform.  He was discharged from the USAR because of misconduct related to the falsification of his records.  The applicant submitted a copy of the altered DA Form 20 which was determined to be altered by the AR 15-6 investigation with this request to the ABCMR.  The applicant is encouraged to refrain from attempting to secure any benefit by using altered military documents again.

BOARD VOTE:
________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___X____  ___X____  ___X___  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 correcting Item 22c of the applicant's DD Form 214 to read "AMEA 1 year,
4 months, and 26 days."

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 adding any foreign service performed in the RVN.



      __________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)                                         AR20080007331



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080007331



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1