IN THE CASE OF:    

		BOARD DATE:  12 July 2016

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150011971


BOARD VOTE:

_________  _______  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____x___  ____x___  ___x_____  DENY APPLICATION


2 Enclosures
1.  Board Determination/Recommendation
2.  Evidence and Consideration


		IN THE CASE OF:    

		BOARD DATE:  12 July 2016

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150011971


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.


		IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE:  12 July 2016

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150011971


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 her DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show her social security number (SSN) as "" instead of "".

2.  The applicant states her SSN is not listed correctly on her DD Form 214.  Her recruiter recorded the wrong SSN.  She was made aware of the error when she applied for benefits through the Department of Veteran Affairs.  

3.  The applicant provides her DD Form 214 and copies of her Nevada State Identification Card, Medicare card, and social security card.

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 30 December 1966, the applicant enlisted in the Women’s Army Corps (WAC) of the Regular Army.  She was assigned an Army Service Number (ASN) as the primary source of identification. 

3.  On 1 January 1967, she completed a DD Form 398 (Statement of Personal History) and listed her SSN as "".

4.  Documents in her record showing the SSN "" include a:

* DA Form 3027 (U.S. Army Request for National Agency Check) 
* DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record)

5.  On 26 March 1968 she was honorably discharged.  Item 3 (SSN) of her      DD Form 214 shows "."

6.  There are no documents in her official military personnel file (OMPF) showing her SSN as "".

7.  She provides her Medicare card and social security card which show her SSN as "".  

REFERENCES:

Army Regulation 635-5 (Separations Documents), in effect during the applicant's active duty service, prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It established standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It stated the DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active service.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.

DISCUSSION:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the WAC of the Regular Army on 30 December 1966 using her service number.  Her service number was the primary means of identification used throughout her entire period of military service.

2.  Certain documents, including a DD Form 398 completed by the applicant, did list her SSN.  Those documents show her SSN as "."  The SSN she states is correct does not appear on any documents in her OMPF. 

3.  For historical purposes, the Army has an interest in maintaining the integrity of its records.  The data and information contained in those records should reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created.  In the absence of a showing of material error or injustice, there is a reluctance to recommend that those records be changed.  While it is understandable the applicant desires to now record her current SSN in her military records, there is not a sufficiently compelling reason for compromising the integrity of the Army’s records at this late date.
   
4.  The applicant is advised that a copy of this decisional document will be filed in her OMPF.  This should serve to clarify any questions or confusion in regard to the difference in the SSN recorded in her military record and the SSN she currently uses.

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//