IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  10 February 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080011441 


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, that the Social Security Account Number (SSAN) listed in his records be corrected.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the SSAN in his military records does not match the one on file at the Social Security Office.   

3.  The applicant provides a Social Security Administration print-out, SSAN card, and a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) letter 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 enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) Army and entered active duty on 22 October 1976.  The enlistment contract (DD Form 4), Report of Medical Examination (SF 88), and all other documents and records prepared during his enlistment processing list the SSAN he now claims is incorrect.  The applicant authenticated the DD Form 4 with his signature in Item 18 (Signature of Applicant).  

3.  The applicant's Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1) which was prepared, on 28 October 1976, at the Reception Station, Fort Knox, Kentucky also lists the SSAN he now claims is incorrect in Item 1 (Name and Service Number).  The applicant authenticated this record with his signature in Item 34 (Signature).  

4.  All documents on file in the applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) that contain a SSAN list the one he now claims is incorrect, and there is no indication in his record that he ever attempted to change his SSAN or to resolve an SSAN discrepancy while he was serving on active duty.

5.  On 4 September 1979, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of unsuitability and received a general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions.  The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued at the time lists the SSAN he now claims is incorrect in Item 3 (Social Security Number).  The applicant authenticated this document with his signature in Item 29 (Signature of Person Being Separated) on the date of his discharge.  

6.  The applicant provides a Social Security Administration print-out, dated 
18 June 2008, which indicates the applicant’s assigned SSAN is different from the one listed throughout his military record and on his separation document.  This document does not address the discrepancy between the two SSANs.  He also provides a SSAN card that lists the number he now claims is correct and a letter from the VA verifying that his military service was performed under the SSAN listed throughout his records, which he now claims is in error. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that the SSAN listed in his military record and in  Item 3 of his DD Form 214 is incorrect has been carefully considered.  However, the evidence of record confirms the applicant enlisted, served and was separated from military service under the SSAN he now claims is incorrect, as evidenced by 

his DD Form 4, DA Form 2-1, and DD Form 214, all of which he authenticated with his signature; thereby, attesting to the accuracy of the information they contain, to include his SSAN.  All documents on file in his OMPF also list the SSAN listed on his enlistment documents, qualification record and DD Form 214, which confirms he performed all of his military service under the SSAN he now claims is incorrect.  

2.  The Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records for historical purposes, and normally would not change an 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.  Although the Social Security Administration print-out provided by the applicant indicates he is assigned an SSAN different from the one listed in his records and on his separation document, 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 discharged.  

3.  This Record 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.  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. 

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)                                         AR20080011441



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080011441



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1