IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	6 August 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150000369


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 reconsideration of a portion of the previous Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) decision as promulgated in Docket Number AR20140000610 on 28 August 2014.  

2.  Specifically, the applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show his military occupational specialty (MOS) as either "Fire Direction Specialist" or "Message Center Clerk," instead of "Lineman."

3.  The applicant states:

   a.  He can only state what he experienced during his deployment.  He had a Fire Direction MOS from Fort Chaffee, Arkansas.  However, he was asked to become a Message Center Clerk after he arrived in Korea; he accepted the position.  

   b.  His duties entailed being in a locked room in the center of a compound.  His location was in an area surrounded by 3 strands of wire against 8 foot strands of vertical wire, with 3 more strands on the inside with a 155 millimeter Howitzer hollow tube that was filled with fuel and lit every 40 meters at night.  The compound was patrolled by armed Korean Augmentation to the U.S. Army (KATUSA) and U.S. Army personnel.  His room was considered a restricted area. He asks, if this wasn't in a combat zone, what was all the security about?  He was allowed to leave his station only to eat and other duties as nature called.  
   
   c.  He had knowledge of all employed divisions and personnel in the area, including the placement of submarines out in the China Sea.  He asks, why would a Lineman be privy to such information?  Especially the coding and decoding machines and their settings?  

   d.  He can only state what he did and what restrictions he lived under.  His parents told him they, as well as other family members, were visited by agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to investigate his character and personnel records for obtaining a Top Secret clearance. 

   e.  In all fairness to the Army, he understands how it made its determination [in his original case], but he was told by a senior noncommissioned officer (NCO) where he worked that he was required to have a Top Secret clearance.  With such a clearance, his MOS would have been a different MOS than "Lineman."  He was told upon his return home for discharge that he could not and should not divulge any sensitive material he may have seen or received.

4.  The applicant provides no additional evidence in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records that were summarized by the ABCMR in the previous consideration of the applicant's case in Docket Number AR20140000610 on 28 August 2014.

2.  The applicant provides an additional argument that was not previously considered and now warrants consideration by the Board.

3.  The applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 3 August 1956.  He served a period of active service that equaled 1 year, 9 months, and 19 days, which included 1 year, 4 months, and 5 days of foreign service.  He was honorably released from active duty on 21 May 1958.  

   a.  Item 25a (Specialty Number and Title) of his DD Form 214 contains the entry "FLD COMMO CRWMN 310.00," which means at the time of his separation, he was considered by the Army to be a qualified Field Communications Crewman.
   
   b.  Item 25b (Related Civilian Occupation and D.O.T. Number) of his DD Form 214 contains the entry "LINEMAN 5-53.440," which means the title of the most closely related civilian occupation to that of his stated MOS "Field Communications Crewman" was the civilian occupation "Lineman." 

4.  His record contains evidence that shows he graduated from the "Artillery Fire Direction Center Course," conducted under the auspices of the I Corps NCO Academy; however, his record is void of any MOS award orders that correspond with the granting of an MOS following the completion of this course.  Additionally, his record is void of any orders or other official documentation that show he was awarded or held any other MOS aside from the MOS that is currently shown on his DD Form 214.

5.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations), in effect at the time, established uniform administrative procedures and separation forms to be used in connection with the separation of military personnel.  This regulation provided guidance specific to the preparation of the DD Form 214.  Specifically, the preparer was instructed that with respect to item 25a, he/she should enter the separating Soldier's primary MOS code number and title.  If the specialty represented by the MOS had a related civilian occupation, the preparer was instructed to enter the appropriate job title and code number from the dictionary of occupational titles in item 25b.  If not applicable, enter "NA."

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show his MOS as either "Fire Direction Specialist" or "Message Center Clerk," instead of "Lineman."

2.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that at the time of his separation, he was considered by the Army to be a qualified Field Communications Crewman.  Accordingly, his DD Form 214 shows his MOS as "FLD COMMO CRWMN 310.00."  Despite the applicant's contentions, it does not show his MOS as "Lineman."

3.  The applicant contends he performed duty in a highly-sensitive area of a secured compound during his service in the Republic of Korea.  While there is no evidence in his record to refute this contention, the MOS listed in item 24a of his DD Form 214 is consistent with his stated duties he performed while in Korea.  

4.  Additionally, there are no orders or other official documentation that show he was awarded or held any other MOS aside from the MOS that is currently shown on his DD Form 214.  Therefore, it appears the MOS listed on his DD Form 214 is correct as stated.

5.  Based on the foregoing, there is an insufficient basis for granting 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 the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20140000610 on 28 August 2014.




      _______ _   __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)                                         AR20140000610



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20150000369



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1