IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	15 September 2009  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090006893 


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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show his social security number (SSN) as "xxx-xx-x9xx" instead of "xxx-xx-x4xx" and to show his rank/grade as private first class (PFC)/E-3 instead of private (PV2)/E-2.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his SSN and rank/grade are incorrectly shown on his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, dated 30 March 1970, and a copy of the Social Security Administration printout, dated 16 April 2009, in support of his request.

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 records show he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years in the rank/grade of private (PVT)/E-1 on 28 April 1967.  His DD Form 4 (Enlistment Record - Armed Forces of the United States) listed his service number; it did not list his SSN.  The applicant authenticated this form by placing his signature in item 57 (Oath of Enlistment - Signature).

3.  The applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) that was created upon the applicant's entrance into the Army shows his SSN as "xxx-xx-x4xx."  The DA Form 20 was audited on 16 June 1969 and the applicant authenticated this form by placing his signature in item 47 (Signature of Individual).

4.  The applicant's records further show he was promoted to PV2/E-2 on 28 August 1967 and PFC/E-3 on 8 December 1967.

5.  On 2 October 1968, Headquarters, 5th Surgical Hospital, Fort Knox, KY, published Unit Orders Number 13 reducing the applicant to PV2/E-2 effective 2 October 1968.

6.  On 10 March 1969, Headquarters, 4th Battalion, 54th Infantry, Fort Knox, KY, published Unit Orders Number 22 promoting the applicant to PFC/E-3 effective 10 March 1969.

7.  On 9 June 1969, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for being disrespectful toward a superior noncommissioned officer on or about 5 June 1969.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to PV2/E-2.  Accordingly, on 11 June 1969, the 219th Aviation Company published Unit Orders Number 45 reducing the applicant to PV2/E-2 effective 11 June 1969.

8.  On 19 December 1969, the applicant authenticated a DA Form 2496 (Disposition Form) stating that "I, PVT(E-2) [Applicant], SSAN xxx-xx-x9xx, hereby decline to apply for continuance on active duty under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-40."

9.  On 28 February 1970, Headquarters, U.S. Army Hospital, Fort Campbell, KY, published Special Orders Number 38, reassigning the applicant from Fort Campbell, KY, to the Veterans Administration (VA) Hospital, Hines, IL.  The orders listed the applicant's SSN as "xxx-xx-x4xx."

10.  On 30 March 1970, by memorandum, Headquarters, U.S. Army Hospital, Fort Campbell, KY, transmitted the applicant's health records to the VA Hospital, Hines, IL.  The memorandum listed the applicant's SSN as "xxx-xx-x4xx."

11.  On 30 March 1970, the applicant was honorably retired and placed on the Retired List by reason of temporary disability.  Item 3 (Social Security Number) of the DD Form 214 he was issued shows his SSN as "xxx-xx-x4xx" and items 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and 5b (Pay Grade) show the entries "PVT" and "E-2."

12.  There is no indication in the applicant's records that he was promoted to PFC/E-3 subsequent to his reduction on 11 June 1969 and prior to his retirement on 30 March 1970.

13.  The applicant submitted a copy of his social security card that shows his SSN as "xxx-xx-x9xx."

14.  Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), in effect at the time, prescribed policies, responsibilities, and procedures pertaining to career management of Army enlisted personnel.  Chapter 7 contained Army-wide promotion policy and procedures.  It stated, in pertinent part, that the promotion of enlisted personnel to grade E-3 through E-9, appointments, grade reductions, and grade restoration were announced in routine orders and that in the case of promotion to E-3 and E-4, unit orders were issued.

15.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  The regulation directs, in pertinent part, that the purpose of the separation document is to provide the individual with documentary evidence of his or her military service.  It is important that information entered on the form should be complete and accurate.  Items 5a and 5b of the version in effect at the time showed the rank/grade in which an enlisted Soldier was serving at the time of separation.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his SSN and rank/grade are incorrectly shown on his DD Form 214.

2.  With respect to his SSN, the evidence of records shows that upon his entry on active duty, the applicant was assigned an SSN that contains the number 4 as the seventh digit as shown on his DA Form 20.  Furthermore, it appears that the applicant indicated and certified that his SSN contained the number 4 as the seventh digit, to include his DD Form 214.  It is unclear why this number was changed to a "9" during his medical retirement process.  It is also unclear why two SSNs were used throughout his military service.


3.  For historical purposes, the U.S. Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records.  In this regard, the information contained therein should reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created and under which the military service was performed.  Therefore, lacking convincing independent and verifiable evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the applicant's military service records, including the DD Form 214, was correct at the time and there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for changing his military service records at this time.  Nevertheless, a copy of this decisional document along with this application will be filed in his service records.  This should serve to clarify any questions or confusion regarding the different SSNs and adequately document his SSN in his record.

4.  With respect to his rank/grade, the evidence of record shows the applicant accepted NJP on 9 June 1969 and was accordingly reduced to PV2/E-2 on 11 June 1969 by reason of misconduct.  There is no evidence in the applicant's records that he was promoted to PFC/E-3 subsequent to his reduction on 11 June 1969 and prior to his retirement on 30 March 1970.

5.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant did not submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to grant him the requested relief.

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)                                         AR20090006893



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090006893



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1