IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 July 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100000715 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, in effect, correction to his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), item 23a (Specialty Number and Title), and his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) to show his primary military occupational specialty (PMOS) as infantry gunner. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that item 23a shows the wrong PMOS probably due to a clerical error. He was never a 63C (Multiple Wheel Vehicle Mechanic). 3. The applicant provides copies of pages 1 and 3 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 records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States in pay grade E-1 on 27 September 1967 for 2 years. 3. The applicant's DA Form 20, item 22 (MOS), shows he was awarded PMOS 11C on 16 February 1968 and this entry is lined through. Item 22 also shows he was awarded PMOS 63C skill level 2 on 10 February 1969 in connection with his temporary promotion to specialist five/pay grade E-5. Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 shows his duty MOS as 11C from 13 August 1968 to 7 September 1968 and MOS 63C from 8 September 1968 to 27 April 1969. He served in Vietnam from 18 April 1968 to 30 April 1969 in both MOS's. 4. The applicant was honorably released from active duty in pay grade E-5 (temporary), on 1 May 1969 as an overseas returnee and was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training). 5. Item 23a of the applicant's DD Form 214 shows MOS "63C2O Multiple Wheel Vehicle Mechanic." Item 23b (Related Civilian Occupation and Dictionary of Occupational Titles Number) shows "620.281 Track Mechanic." 6. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), then in effect, governed the preparation of the DD Form 214. It stated that the DD Form 214 provided a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge. The regulation stated that item 23a would list the Soldier's primary MOS code number and title at the time of release from active duty. If the specialty represented by the MOS had a related civilian occupation, item 23b would list the appropriate job title and code number from the dictionary of occupational titles. If not applicable, "N/A" would be entered in item 23b. There were no provisions for listing more than one MOS code number and title. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends, in effect, that item 23a of his DD Form 214 should reflect MOS 11C. 2. The evidence of record shows he was awarded and served in MOS 11C from 13 August 1968 to 7 September 1968. He was later awarded PMOS 63C and served in MOS 63C from 8 September 1968 to 26 April 1969 and was released from active duty on 1 May 1969. Therefore, his PMOS at the time of his release from active duty was 63C and is properly shown in item 23a of his DD Form 214. 3. Neither the evidence submitted with the application nor the evidence of record supports his request nor does it establish that item 23a of his DD Form 214 should reflect MOS 11C. Therefore, he is not entitled to a correction of item 23a of his DD Form 214. 4. It is noted that the DA Form 20 and the DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) are no longer posted and maintained after a Soldier has been released or separated from active duty, whether at the expiration of his term of service, retirement, or discharge. These documents were not intended to be continued in force and maintained (continually posted) after a Soldier's separation from active duty. To add or change any entries at this time would serve no useful purpose. 5. In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement. 6. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request. 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) AR20100000715 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100000