IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  30 September 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080009943 


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 military service records to show that he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was assigned on temporary duty (TDY) to the U.S. Army Detachment at Tan Son Nut Air Base (Cam Rahn Bay, RVN) for
6 months during 1966 and 1967.  He also states that the TDY orders that were approved by the Pentagon for the classified mission were among the military records destroyed in the fire at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  He adds that he initiated an intense “in search of” campaign as a means of getting in touch with former Soldiers from his unit and, on 5 January 2006, he obtained a digital download that pertained to 6 buddies and also his former commanding officer.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), with an effective date of 1 July 1968; VA Form 21-0781 (Statement in Support of Claim for Service Connection for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)), dated 30 November 2007; 2 pages of information from the Vet Friends website at: http://www.vetfriends.com; and an American Legion Contact Card, Temporary Membership Card.

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 show that he enlisted and entered active duty in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years on 2 July 1965.  Upon completion of basic combat training and advanced individual training, he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 71H (Personnel Specialist).

3.  The applicant's military service records contain a DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record):

     a.  Item 19 (Investigations and Clearances) shows a Background Investigation was completed on 26 August 1966 by the U.S. Army Intelligence Command (USAINTC).

     b.  Item 31 (Foreign Service) is absent an entry.

     c.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) shows, in pertinent part, that he was assigned to the Returnee-Reassignment Station, U.S. Army Personnel Center  (USAPERSCEN) (6020), Oakland, California from 22 January 1966 through
31 March 1966.  This item also shows that the applicant was assigned to Headquarters Company, USAPERSCEN (6021), Fort Lewis, Washington from
1 April 1966 through 30 April 1966.  This item further shows that the applicant was assigned to U.S. Army Returnee-Reassignment Station, USAPERSCEN (6021), Fort Lewis, Washington from 1 May 1966 through 30 June 1968.

     d.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Good Conduct Medal, and Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with (M-14) Rifle Bar.

     e.  Item 47 (Signature of Individual) shows that the applicant reviewed the information on the DA Form 20 and placed his signature on the document on
10 March 1967.  This item also shows that the applicant audited the information on the DA Form 20 on 1 July 1968.


4.  The applicant’s military service records contain a DA Form 2171 (Request for Tuition Assistance - General Educational Development Program), dated
4 February 1966.  This document shows, in pertinent part, that the applicant was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, USAPERSCEN, Oakland, California and that he placed his signature on this document requesting tuition assistance to attend the Social Psychology course at San Francisco State College, San Francisco, California that was to be held at the Presidio of San Francisco (California) from 7 February 1966 to 28 March 1966.

5.  The applicant’s military service records contain a DD Form 1172 (Application for Uniformed Services Identification and Privilege Card), dated 23 May 1966.  This document shows, in pertinent part, that the applicant was assigned to Headquarters Company, USAPERSCEN (6021), Fort Lewis, Washington and that he placed his signature on this document requesting that a dependent identification card be issued to his spouse.  This document also shows that the second lieutenant assigned to Headquarters Company, USAPERSCEN (6021), Fort Lewis, Washington verified the information on the document.

6.  The applicant’s military service records contain a DA Form 1049 (Personnel Action), dated 13 September 1966.  This document shows that the colonel serving as Assistant Chief of Staff, G2, Fort Lewis, Washington confirmed that a Background Investigation on the applicant was completed on 26 August 1966 by USAINTC; however, the investigation did not meet the requirement for access to classified defense information.  This document also shows that the colonel requested appropriate entries be made on the applicant’s DA Form 20.

7.  The applicant’s military service records contain a copy of Headquarters, U.S. Army Personnel Center, Fort Lewis, Washington, Special Orders Number 146, dated 1 October 1966, that show the applicant qualified Sharpshooter with the  M-14 rifle on 27 September 1966 at Fort Lewis, Washington.

8.  The applicant’s military service records contain a DA Form 2171, dated
12 June 1967.  This document shows, in pertinent part, that the applicant was assigned to Headquarters Company, USAPERSCEN (6021), Fort Lewis, Washington and that he placed his signature on this document requesting tuition assistance to attend the Risk and Insurance Principles course at the University of Puget Sound, Tacoma, Washington that was to be held at Fort Lewis, Washington from 19 June 1967 to 9 August 1967.

9.  The applicant’s military service records contain a copy of Headquarters, U.S. Army Personnel Center, Fort Lewis, Washington, Special Orders Number 365, dated 31 December 1967, that show the applicant qualified Sharpshooter with the M-14 rifle on 23 October 1967 at Fort Lewis, Washington.
10.  The applicant’s military service records are absent orders or a Department of the Army message ordering the applicant TDY to the RVN during 1966 or 1967.

11.  The applicant's military service records contain a copy of his DD Form 214, with an effective date of 1 July 1968.  This document shows that the applicant entered active duty this period on 2 July 1965, was honorably released from active duty on 1 July 1968, and credited with completing 3 years, 0 months, and 0 days net service this period.  Item 22 (Statement of Service), block c (Foreign and/or Sea Service) contains the entry “NONE.”  Item 30 (Remarks) is absent any reference to service in the RVN.  This document also shows the applicant was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement), U.S. Army Administration Center, St. Louis, Missouri.  Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Transferred or Discharged) of the DD Form 214 shows that the applicant placed his signature on the document.

12.  In support of his application, the applicant provides the following documents:

     a.  A copy of his DD Form 214, with an effective date of 1 July 1968.  This document was previously introduced and considered in this Record of Proceedings.

     b.  VA Form 21-0781, dated 30 November 2007, that was prepared by the applicant for submission to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in support of his claim for service connection for PTSD.  This document shows, in pertinent part, the applicant stated that he performed the primary duties of unit morning report clerk at Tan Son Nut Air Base (RVN) where he was responsible for the daily reporting of Soldiers killed in action, missing in action, taken prisoners of war, and also medically evacuated.  He also states that he witnessed the mutilated body parts of dead Soldiers while verifying and documenting all of the casualties.

     c.  Two pages of printed information from the Vet Friends website at: http://www.vetfriends.com.  One page contains 3 small grainy pictures with a total of 6 men in what appears to be U.S. Army fatigue uniforms.  The other page is a brief military biography pertaining to (then) Captain Robert Y_______.

     d.  American Legion Contact Card, Temporary Membership Card, that identifies the applicant as a war-time veteran of the United States Armed Forces, qualified to receive all American Legion services and benefits.

13.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations - Separation Documents), in effect at the time of the applicant's separation from active duty, prescribed policies and procedures regarding separation documents.  It also established standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  This Army regulation states that the purpose of a separation document is to provide the individual with documentary evidence of their military service at the time of separation.  Therefore, it is important the information entered thereon is complete and accurate as of that date.

14.  Section III (Instructions for Preparation and Distribution of the Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) of Army Regulation 635-5 contains guidance on the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It states, in pertinent part, that all available records will be used as a basis for the preparation of the DD Form 214, including the Enlisted Qualification Record, Officer Qualification Record, and orders.  Paragraph 51 (Item 22c), subparagraph b (Enlisted personnel), states, in pertinent part, "[e]nter total active duty outside continental limits of the United States for the period covered by the DD Form 214 and the last oversea theater service was performed."  Paragraph 62 (Item 30 - Remarks), in pertinent part, instructs to enter inclusive dates of service in Vietnam during current period of service.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends, in effect, that his military service records should be corrected to show that he served in the RVN for 6 months in 1966 and 1967 because the TDY orders that were approved by the Pentagon for the classified mission in the RVN were among the military records destroyed in the fire at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973. 

2.  During the processing of this case, the applicant’s military records were obtained from the National Personnel Records Center, St. Louis, Missouri.  The applicant’s military personnel records were intact and gave no appearance of having been damaged in the fire that occurred in 1973.

3.  There is no evidence of record that shows the applicant was assigned TDY to the U.S. Army Detachment at Tan Son Nut Air Base (RVN) for 6 months during 1966 and/or 1967.  In fact, the evidence of record shows that the applicant’s Background Investigation, completed on 26 August 1966, did not meet the requirement for access to classified defense information.  Thus, it is unlikely that the applicant would have been assigned TDY on an approved classified mission to the RVN by the U.S. Army (i.e., the Pentagon) as the applicant contends in his application for correction of his military records. Moreover, a thorough review of the applicant’s records failed to produce any evidence that he served overseas in the RVN.


4.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was trained and performed the duties of a Personnel Specialist during his entire military service.  The evidence of record also shows that he reviewed his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) on 10 March 1967 and 1 July 1968 (i.e., the date of his separation).  Nonetheless, despite the applicant’s specialized training and knowledge in personnel management, there is no evidence on his DA Form 20 that he served overseas in the RVN.  Moreover, the applicant’s review of the document indicates that the applicant affirmed the information (or, in this case, lack thereof) on the DA Form 20 was an accurate representation of his military service.

5.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant reviewed his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Separation) on 1 July 1968 (i.e., the date of his separation) and placed his signature on the document.  Once again, despite the applicant’s specialized training and knowledge in personnel management, there is no evidence in Item 22, block c (Foreign and/or Sea Service) or Item 30 (Remarks) of the DD Form 214 the applicant served overseas in the RVN.  Moreover, the applicant’s review of the document indicates that the applicant affirmed the information (or, in this case, lack thereof) on the DD Form 214 is an accurate representation of his military service.

6.  The photographs and military biography provided by the applicant pertaining to Soldiers from his unit are not in question.  However, this documentation provides insufficient evidence upon which to base making a correction to the applicant’s military service records.

7.  In view of all of the foregoing, it is determined that the applicant’s military service records properly and accurately document his military service during the period of service under review.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to correction of his military service records.

8.  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.

9.  The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.



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)                                         AR20080009943



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080009943



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1