RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 May 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060014490 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 Mr. Dean L. Turnbull Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Mr. Paul M. Smith Chairperson Mr. David K. Haasenritter Member Mr. Edward E. Montgomery 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 that item 19 (Date and Place of Entry into Active Service) of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) be corrected. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that item 19 (Date and Place of Entry into Active Service) should read Rutland, Vermont not Burlington, Vermont. He states that he did not go to Burlington, Vermont to enlist. He is requesting to make the change because it is the way his record should be, and to substantiate claims and benefits. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which occurred on 31 January 1954. The application submitted in this case is dated 3 October 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 military records are not available to the Board for review. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members’ records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973. It is believed that the applicant’s records were lost or destroyed in that fire. However, there were sufficient documents for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case. The primary record available to this Board is the applicant’s DD Form 214 with an effective date of separation of 31 January 1954. 4. The applicant's reconstructed records show that he entered active duty for three years on 1 February 1951. 5. His most significant duty assignment was with the 9330th "TSU" Military Police Detachment. He was honorably discharged on 31 January 1954. He had completed a total of 3 years of active service. 6. Item 19 (Date and Place of Entry into Active Service) of the applicant's DD Form 214 contains the entry 1 February 1951, Burlington, Vermont. 7. Special Regulation 615-360 (Enlisted Personnel), then in effect, establishes the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. In pertinent part, it directs that you enter for personnel who were inducted, enlisted, or reenlisted, the city and state where the induction, enlistment or reenlistment was accomplished in item 19 (Date and Place of Entry into Active Duty) of the DD Form 214. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that his place of entry on his DD Form 214 is incorrect. 2. It is reasonable to assume the place of entry on active duty in Item 19 of the applicant's DD Form 214 is correct as shown. The applicant's signature on the DD Form 214 verifies the entry on the DD Form 214 as correct. 3. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the applicant's processing of his DD Form 214 was administratively correct. 4. In this regard, the Board does not correct properly constituted records just to establish entitlement to a benefit. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. 5. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 31 January 1954; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on   30 January 1957. 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 ___pms__ ___eem_ ____dkh_ 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. __________Paul M. Smith________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20060014490 SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED 20070501 TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) DATE OF DISCHARGE YYYYMMDD DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR . . . . . DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION DENY REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.