IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 4 June 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140018569 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 of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) by showing: * His last name spelled with two "L," vice just one "L" * His assignment to "Headquarters" while in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) * His training as a diesel mechanic and as a projectionist 2. The applicant states his records do not show the correct spelling of his last name, his assignment to a headquarters while in the RVN, or his training as a diesel mechanic and a projectionist. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 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. The applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 4 March 1966. He was sent to Fort Dix, New Jersey where he completed basic combat training on or about 27 May 1966. 3. On 28 May 1966, the applicant commenced advanced individual training at Fort Dix, New Jersey. On 1 July 1966, he was awarded military occupational specialty 64A (Light Vehicle Driver) 4. The applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows: a. Block 27 (Military Training): completion of the Light Vehicle Driver Course in 1966; b. Block 28 (Specialized Training): completion of the code of conduct and military justice training in accordance with the Army Training Program (ATP) 21-114; and c. Block 38 (Record of Assignments): service in the RVN with the 24th Transportation Company as a light vehicle driver from 11 August 1966 to 8 August 1967. 5. On or about 17 September 1967, the applicant was assigned to Fort Riley, Kansas. On 4 March 1968, the applicant was released (REFRAD) and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training). He had attained the rank of private first class, pay grade E-3, and completed 2 years and 1 day of creditable active duty service. His DD Form 214, as subsequently corrected by DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214), shows: * His last name spelled with two "Ls" * His training in code of conduct, military justice, and as a light vehicle driver 6. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), as then in effect, provided detailed instructions for completing separation documents, including the DD Form 214.  It provided that the DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty. It provided a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge. The DD Form 214 did not provide for showing an individual's specific unit of assignment except for his last unit. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected by showing: * His last name spelled with two "Ls" vice just one "L" * His assignment to "Headquarters" while in the RVN * His training as a diesel mechanic and as a projectionist 2. The evidence of record shows that a DD Form 215 was issued to correct the applicant's last name in the same manner in which he is now asking. Therefore, no further action is required for this issue. 3. There is no available evidence of record, and the applicant has not provided any documentary evidence showing that he completed training as a diesel mechanic or as a projectionist. Therefore, this portion of his request should be denied. 4. The available evidence shows that the applicant served in the RVN with the 24th Transportation Company as a light vehicle driver. It does not specify that he was a member of a headquarters staff. Accordingly, there is no apparent error to correct. 5. In view of the above, the applicant's request should be denied. However, it would be appropriate to provide him a copy of the DD Form 215 that corrected his DD Form 214. 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) AR20140018569 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140018569 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1