RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 March 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060010851 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Mr. Gerard W. Schwartz Acting Director Mrs. Victoria A. Donaldson Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Ms. Margaret K. Patterson Chairperson Mr. Larry W. Racster Member Mr. Rodney E. Barber Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his record be corrected to show his military occupational specialty (MOS) was cryptographer. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that his MOS is not correctly shown on his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge). 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 in support of this application. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 8 August 1961, the date of his transfer to the United States Army Reserve (USAR). The application submitted in this case is dated 21 July 2006. 2. 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 allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file. 3. The applicant’s record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 30 July 1958. His Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that he held the primary MOS of 293.10 (Radio Relay and Carrier Operator) and his duty MOS was 951.10 (Military Police). 4. Item 33 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows the applicant served in MOS 293.10 (Radio Relay and Carrier Operator) from 24 September 1959 through 24 April 1961. It also shows the served in MOS 760.00 (Supply Clerk) from 25 April through 15 May 1961, and that he again served in MOS 293.10 (Radio Relay and Carrier Operator) from 16 May through 8 August 1961, at which time he was released from active duty and transferred to the United States Army Reserve. 5. There is no evidence in the available records which shows that the applicant was awarded and/or served in the MOS cryptographer. 6. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge, release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army. It also establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. The regulation in effect at the time contained the guidance on Item 23a entries in paragraph 52. It stated, in effect, that the MOS code number and titled contained on the DA Form 20 would be entered in Item 23a of the DD Form 214. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s contention that he performed the primary duty of cryptographer during his military service was carefully considered. However, by regulation the required MOS entry in Item 23a of the DD Form 214 was the MOS documented in the DA Form 20. 2. The applicant’s DA Form 20 confirms he was trained in and awarded MOS 293.10 and that he was assigned to positions authorized that MOS throughout his active duty tenure. Therefore, there is no basis to grant the relief requested. 3. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 8 August 1961; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 7 August 1964. The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __LWR___ _MKP___ _REB __ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined that 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. 2. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of limitations prescribed by law. Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _M. K. Patterson__ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED YYYYMMDD TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) DATE OF DISCHARGE YYYYMMDD DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR . . . . . DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.