ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	
	BOARD DATE:  23 September 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20190000469


APPLICANT REQUESTS: correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty) to show is primary military occupational specialty (MOS) as 
19DR8 (Cavalry Scout) instead of 19H2O (Armor Reconnaissance Vehicle Driver).  He 
further requests a personal appearance before the Board. 

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	DD Form 214, for the period ending 20 December 1979

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United 
States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of 
Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined 
it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 

2.  The applicant states upon his discharge his MOS was listed as 19H2O and should 
now be 19DR8 (formerly 11DR8 – Armor Reconnaissance Specialist, M551 Sheridan 
qualified).

     a.  He completed one station unit training (OSUT) for 11D in March 1976 and went 
on to complete M551 Sheridan training in April 1976.  In 1978, while serving with  
2d Armored Cavalry Regiment (2d ACR) in Germany, his MOS was changed to 19D.  
He assumed that as he was then serving on a M551 Sheridan, his skill identifier of R8 
still applied.  

     b.  Some months later he was told that the 19D MOS would no longer be in use and 
his MOS was changed to 19H.  His last assignment was with the 9th Cavalry at Fort 
Hood, Texas and while he was there his primary duties were as an Armor 
Reconnaissance Specialist assigned to an M551 Sheridan.  He recently became aware 
that the 19D MOS was back in use; therefore, his MOS at his discharge should reflect 
this. 

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 November 1976.  His  
DD Form 1966/1 (Application for Enlistment - Armed Forces of the United States) shows 
he enlisted for a four-years for training in MOS 11D (Armor Reconnaissance Specialist). 

4.  DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record - Part II) shows he was awarded MOS 
11D on 30 April 1976 and was assigned to the 2d ACR in the Federal Republic of 
Germany.  Item 17 (Civilian Education and Military Schools) shows he attended the 
Sheridan course and lists 11D1OR8.    

5.  Orders 87-22 issued by United States Army Regional Personnel Center, Nurnberg, 
dated 28 March 1978 shows the applicant's MOS of 11D1OR8 was withdrawn and he 
was awarded MOS 19H1O effective 1 March 1978. 

6.  Orders 55-3 issued by United States Army Regional Personnel Center, 
Grafenwoehr, dated 28 February 1979, promoted the applicant to specialist five (SP5) 
and shows his primary MOS of 19H2O.  

7.  The applicant was honorably released from active duty on 20 December 1979 by 
reason of completion of required service and transferred to the United States Army 
Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement).  Item 11 (Primary Specialty Number, 
Title and Years and Months in Specialty) of his DD Form 214 shows the entry "19H2O, 
Armor Reconnaissance Vehicle Driver, 3 years and 8 months." 

8.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), dated 15 August 1979, states to 
enter the MOS codes, titles, years, and months for warrant officers and enlisted 
personnel in item 11 at the time of separation.

9.  Army Regulation 611-201 (Enlisted Career Management Fields and Military 
Occupational Specialties), prescribes the enlisted MOS classification structure of the 
United States Army.  It is noted that special qualifications identifier (SQI) of R8 was 
used to identify "Airborne Cavalry Sheridan Armor Tank", but is no longer utilized.  

10.  The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before the Board.  
However, by regulation, an applicant is not entitled to a hearing before the Board.  
Hearings may be authorized by the Director or the ABCMR if it is determined necessary 
to serve the interest of equity and justice. 








 
BOARD DISCUSSION:

1. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents and 
evidence in the records.  The Board considered the applicant’s statement, his record of 
service, changes to Army policy and changes to his MOS, his completion of the 
Sheridan course and the MOS shown on his DD Form 214 at the time of his discharge.  
The Board found that he was trained as an Armor Reconnaissance Specialist and 
determined that was an equivalent of Cavalry Scout (19D).  Based on a preponderance 
of evidence, the Board determined that the applicant’s MOS should be changed as a 
matter of equity.   

2. The applicant's request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully considered. 
In this case, the evidence of record was sufficient to render a fair and equitable 
decision. As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not necessary to serve the 
interest of equity and justice in this case.
3. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that 
relief was warranted.




























BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

: X	:X	:X	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:	:	:	DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1. The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a 
recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all 
Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending 
the DD Form 214 for the period of service ending 20 December 1979 to add in Item 11 
(Primary Specialty Number, Title and Years and Months in Specialty) – “19D20R8.”

2.  The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a 
portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of 
the application that pertains to a personal appearance.

 


	  
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.


ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S):

Not Applicable

?
REFERENCES:

1.  Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military 
records must be filed within three 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 three-year statute of 
limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.

2.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), dated 15 August 1979, prescribed 
the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release 
from active military service or control of the Army.  

     a. It established standardized policy for 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 
duty, providing a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release 
from active duty, retirement, or discharge.  

     b.  Item 11 of the DD Form 214 states to enter the MOS codes, titles, years, and 
months for warrant officers and enlisted personnel.  For commissioned officers enter the 
specialty skill identifier (SSI) (two digits and one letter), title, years, and months. 

3.  Army Regulation 611-201 (Enlisted Career Management Fields and Military 
Occupational Specialties), in effect at the time, prescribes the enlisted MOS 
classification structure of the United States Army.

4.  Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) states ABCMR members will review all 
applications that are properly before it to determine the existence of an error or injustice 
and direct or recommend changes in military records to correct the error or injustice, if 
persuaded that material error or injustice exists and that sufficient evidence exists on 
the record.  The ABCMR will decide cases on the evidence of record.  It is not an 
investigative body.  The ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing.  Applicants do 
not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR.  The Director or the ABCMR may grant 
a formal hearing whenever justice requires.




ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20190000469
	
4

1