IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 July 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110000649 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 correction of his military records to consolidate his two DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) into one document. 2. The applicant states he was discharged upon completion of Officer Candidate School. He was then commissioned and immediately ordered to active duty the next day. This effectively resulted in a single period of active duty, not two as the current DD Forms 214 indicate. The applicant contends that he is denied Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits because of the multiple DD Forms 214. 3. The applicant provides copies of his two DD Forms 214. 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. On 3 July 1984, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. He was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman). 3. In July 1985, the applicant completed Officer Candidate School. He was subsequently discharged on 25 July 1985 for the purpose of accepting a commission. 4. The applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 25 July 1985 reports that he completed 1 year and 23  days of creditable active duty service. The characterization of his service was honorable. The narrative reason for his discharge was to accept a commission in the U.S. Army. 5. Orders 63-1-A-253, Headquarters, U.S. Army Infantry Center, Fort Benning, Georgia, dated 20 May 1985, ordered the applicant to active duty in the rank of second lieutenant effective 26 July 1985 for a period of 3 years. 6. On 26 July 1985, the applicant was appointed as an infantry second  lieutenant/pay grade O-1 for an indefinite term. 7. On 30 June 1987, the applicant was released from active duty due to miscellaneous reasons. His DD Form 214 ending this date indicates he attained the rank of first lieutenant/pay grade O-2. He completed 1 year, 11 months, and 5 days of net active service during this period and 1 year and 23 days of prior active service. 8. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) provides detailed instructions for completing separation documents, including the DD Form 214. It states the DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty. It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge. The DD Form 214 is not intended to have any legal effect on the termination of a Soldier's service. A DD Form 214 will be prepared for enlisted members who become commissioned or warrant officers and have their enlisted status terminated. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that his military records should be corrected to consolidate his two DD Forms 214 because he is being denied VA benefits. 2. The evidence of record clearly shows the applicant completed 1 year and 23 days of active duty service in an enlisted status. During this period he completed Officer Candidate School. He was subsequently discharged as an enlisted Soldier for the purpose of accepting a commission in the U.S. Army. By regulation, a DD Form 214 for this period of enlisted service was prepared. 3. The day following his discharge as an enlisted Soldier, the applicant was commissioned as a second lieutenant and ordered to active duty for a period of 3 years. On 30 June 1987, he was released from active duty. By regulation, a DD Form 214 was prepared for this period of commissioned officer service. 4. The applicant's two DD Forms 214 accurately reflect the circumstances of his service. The regulatory provisions governing the preparation of DD Forms 214 do not provide for consolidating multiple periods of active duty service into a single DD Form 214. 5. In this case, there is no error or injustice. Therefore, the applicant's request should be denied. 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 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) AR20110000649 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110000649 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1