IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  6 July 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090021540 


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 the duty military occupational specialty (MOS) 55A (Ammunition Helper) in item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) be changed to read 55B (Ammunition Storage Specialist).  He also requests the first unit to which he was assigned in Germany be included in item 38 of his DA Form 20.

2.  The applicant states he never received orders changing his MOS from 55B to 55A.  He also states the first unit to which he was assigned in Germany does not appear anywhere in his records.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of item 38 of his DA Form 20.

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 personnel records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 21 December 1965.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded MOS 55B.

3.  U.S. Army Missile and Munitions Center and School, Redstone Arsenal, AL, Special Orders Number 104, dated 16 May 1966, assigned the applicant to the 664th Ordnance Company in Germany.  He was ordered to report no later than 1500 hours on 4 June 1966 to the Military Airlift Command Passenger Terminal, McGuire Air Force Base.

4.  Headquarters, 57th Ordnance Brigade, in Germany directed the reassignment of the applicant from the 664th Ordnance Company to the 23rd Ordnance Company in Germany.  The orders state he was to proceed and report on 16 June 1966.

5.  Item 38 of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows duty MOS 55A, principle duty ammunition helper, organization and station 23rd Ordnance Company, U.S. Army Europe, effective 6 June 1966.

6.  Item 38 of the applicant's DA Form 20 does not show he was assigned to the 664th Ordnance Company.

7.  On 1 December 1967, the applicant was released from active duty.  He had completed 1 year, 11 months, and 11 days of active service that was characterized as honorable.  Item 23a (Specialty Number and Title) of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows his MOS as 55B.

8.  Chapter 9 (Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Forms 20, 20A, 20B, and 2876) of Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), then in effect, stated the DA Form 20 was the basic document for maintaining current data necessary to manage enlisted personnel and document their military career and provided for the preparation and maintenance of the DA Form 20.

	a.  Paragraph 9-51b(1)(c) stated entries of assignments would be made in chronological order and reflect a record of all military service of the individual.  A new line entry is required upon reassignment and two or more calendar days' lapse between date of departure and date of arrival at new station.

	b.  Paragraph 9-51b(2)(b) stated the duty MOS was to be entered in pencil.  If the duty MOS changed within 29 days, the new duty MOS would be entered in pencil.  If the duty MOS did not change for 30 days, the entry would be made permanent.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his first duty assignment in Germany is not listed on his DA Form 20.

2.  The regulation governing entries on the DA Form 20 stated an entry would be made upon reassignment and two or more calendar days' lapse between the date of departure and the day of arrival.

3.  Orders assigned the applicant to the 664th Ordnance Company to report at 1500 hours, 4 June 1966, for transportation to Germany.  Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude he did not arrive in Germany before 5 June.  His DA Form 20 shows he was assigned to the 23rd Ordnance Company effective 6 June 1966.  Therefore, he would not have been assigned to the 664th Ordnance Company for 2 calendar days or more.  However, orders for him to proceed and report on 16 June 1966 to the 23rd Ordnance Company were issued on 7 June 1966 by the 57th Ordnance Brigade.

4.  Because of the inconsistency of the above dates, there is insufficient evidence to show the applicant's exact dates of arrival and departure from the 664th Ordnance Company.  Without this evidence, a determination cannot be made as to whether or not he was assigned to the 664th Ordnance Company for 2 or more calendar days.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to make any changes to his record of assignments.

5.  The duty MOS in item 38 of the applicant's DA Form 20 was written in pencil.  There are no further entries in item 38.  Therefore, there is no way to conclude whether the applicant was assigned those duties for 29 days or less or if the duties were assigned for 30 days or more.  The duty MOS reflects actual duties assigned to a Soldier and may or may not coincide with his actual MOS.  Therefore, there would be no basis to make any changes to a duty MOS.

6.  The applicant was awarded MOS 55B upon completion of his advanced individual training.  The fact that he may have been assigned duties in another MOS does not in and of itself change his MOS.  There are no orders changing his MOS.  The applicant maintained MOS 55B until his release from active duty as evidenced by the entry in item 23a of his DD Form 214.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  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.



      _________________________
                 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)                                         AR20090021540



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090021540



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1