RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 September 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070001664 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. Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano Director Mr. Dean L. Turnbull Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Mr. Larry C. Bergquist Chairperson Ms. Marla J. N. Troup Member Ms. Ernestine I. Fields 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 his records be corrected to show that he was a second lieutenant or equivalent while serving on active duty. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that he was a second lieutenant (field rank) from 1952 to 1953 while in combat. He states he needs this correction since he is filing for service connected disability. 3. The applicant provides six statements that describe his character as a caring and well respected person in his community and a copy of a Certification of Military Service. 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 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 remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case. 3. The applicant reconstructed records do not show what rank the applicant held while on active duty. His reconstructed records show only that he was on active duty for training from 3 February 1957 to 2 August 1957. There are no records of his having any prior active service that would help validate his claim that he was a second lieutenant while serving in combat. 4. The Certification of Military Service that the applicant submitted shows that the applicant was a member of the United States Army Reserve. His last grade, rank, or rating was recorded as private. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that his records should be corrected to show that he was a second lieutenant while serving on active duty. 2. There is no evidence in the applicant's reconstructed records that can substantiate he was a second lieutenant at anytime during his tour on active duty for training. 3. The six statements submitted on behalf of the applicant that describes his character as a caring and well respected person in his community are noted. However, they are not sufficient to warrant a correction to his records. 4. The Board must review a case with a presumption of regularity, that what the Army did was correct. It is up to the applicant to prove otherwise. The applicant has not submitted any documentation to overcome the presumption of regularity. 5. The ABCMR does not correct records solely for the purpose of establishing eligibility for benefits. In addition, granting veteran's benefits is not within the purview of the ABCMR and any questions regarding eligibility for treatment and other benefits should be addressed to the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___eif___ ___mjnt__ ___lcb___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. 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. The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation. The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms. _________Larry C. Bergquist________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070001664 SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED 20070911 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.