IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 January 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080018257 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, that item 8 (Pace of Birth) of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation From Active Duty) with an effective date of 16 April 1971 be changed to read Chesterfield, England instead of Greenville, Michigan. 2. The applicant states at the time of his discharge he was told to verify the information on his DD Form 214 and make changes if the information was incorrect. He states "they" were rushed and no one followed up on correcting any errors that were annotated. 3. The applicant provides, in support of his application, copies of his DD Form 214 with an effective date of 16 April 1971 and two DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with separation dates of 26 September 1987 and 30 September 1988. 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 personnel records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 April 1968 for a period of 3 years. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty of 11E (Armor Crewman). 3. Item 23 (Place of Birth) of the applicant's DD Form 4 (Enlistment Contract - Armed Forces of the United States) contains the entry "Greenville, Michigan." 4. On 16 April 1971, the applicant was released from active duty by reason of the expiration of his period of service. He had completed 2 years, 11 months, and 29 days of active service that was characterized as honorable. 5. Item 8 of the applicant's DD Form 214 with an effective date of 16 April 1971 contains the entry "Greenville, Michigan," which has a line drawn through it and the hand written entry "Chesterfield, England" was annotated. 6. All copies of the applicant's DD Form 214 with an effective date of 16 April 1971 in the applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) show the same hand annotated correction. 7. The applicant went on to serve two periods of service in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) from 17 April 1971 to 17 April 1974 and from 21 February 1980 to 30 March 1989. He also served one period of service in the Michigan Army National Guard from 21 November 1989 to 3 August 1992. Documents completed, and contained in his MPRJ, throughout these periods of service reflect the applicant's place of birth as Chesterfield, England. 8. The applicant's MPRJ contained copies of the following documents: a. a Certified Copy of an Entry of Birth showing the applicant was born on 26 January 1946 in the Sub-District of Chesterfield in the county of Derby, England; b. a Certificate of Citizenship, No. AA-345735, showing the applicant was born on 26 January 1946 in England and became a citizen of the United States of America on 26 January 1946; and c. a copy of the applicant's passport showing his birthplace as the United Kingdom. 9. The two DD Forms 214 with a separation dates of 26 September 1987 and 30 September 1988 do not contain areas for the entry of a member's place of birth. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's statement that he was to verify the information on his DD Form 214 and change it if it was incorrect is corroborated by the fact that all copies of the DD Form 214 in his MPRJ contained the same hand written annotation. It is apparent that the corrections were not made as stated by the applicant. 2. Based on the preponderance of evidence in this case it is apparent the applicant was born in Chesterfield, England. Therefore, it is appropriate that item 8 of the applicant's DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect Chesterfield, England. 3. Based on the above, it would also be appropriate to correct item 23 of the applicant's DD Form 4 to reflect Chesterfield, England. 4. The two DD Forms 214 with a separation dates of 26 September 1987 and 30 September 1988 have no areas for the place of birth. Therefore, there is no correction to be made to these two documents. BOARD VOTE: ___X____ ___X___ ___X____ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending item 8 of the applicant's DD Form 214 with an effective date of 16 April 1971 and item 23 of his DD Form 4 dated 18 April 1968 to read Chesterfield, England instead of Greenville, Michigan. _______ _ 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) AR20080018257 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080018257 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1