MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 15 August 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002072611

         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson
Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Member
Mr. Jose A. Martinez		Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

---

APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that the last name listed in his 7 April 1969 and 26 May 1970 separation documents (DD Forms 214) be corrected; and that the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM), and Purple Heart (PH) be added to the 7 April 1969 DD Form 214.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that the spelling of his last name is incorrect on the two of his separation documents issued in 1969 and 1970. In support of this request, he provides a copy of a birth certificate, which he claims shows the correct spelling of his last name. He also indicates that his 1969 separation document should also include the following awards that he earned during that period of service: CIB; ARCOM; and PH.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:

The Board previously considered the applicant’s request for the awards he is now trying to add to his separation document. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's previous consideration of this request (AC98-06528) on
15 July 1998.

On 15 June 1967, the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States and entered active duty. He completed this first 1 year, 9 month, and 23 day period of active duty service on 7 April 1969, at which time he was honorably separated. The DD Form 214 issued to him for this period of service lists the last name he now claims is incorrect in Item 1 (Name). In addition, the applicant signed this document in Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Separated) using the last name he now claims is incorrect.

The applicant’s record confirms that he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) for 12 months, between April 1967 and April 1968. The 1969 separation document shows that he earned the following awards during this period of service: National Defense Service Medal (NDSM); Vietnam Campaign Medal, now known as the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVNCM) with 60 Device; Vietnam Service Medal (VSM); and PH.

On 17 July 1969, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army for three years. The Enlistment Contract-Armed Forces of the United States (DD Form 4) prepared upon his entry on this period of service lists the last name he now claims is incorrect in Item 5 (Name). In addition, the applicant signed this document in both Item 55 and Item 57, both his signatures contain the last name he now claims is incorrect.

---

On 26 May 1970, the applicant completed a 10 month and 11 day period of active duty service when he was honorably separated in order to immediately reenlist. The DD Form 214 issued to him for this period of service lists the last name he now claims is incorrect in Item 1 (Name). In addition, he signed this document in Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Separated) using the last name he now claims is incorrect. No awards or decorations are listed in this separation document for this period of service.

On 27 May 1970, the applicant reenlisted for 6 years. The last name listed in Item 5 (Name) of the DD Form 4 prepared for this enlistment contains the last name he now claims is incorrect. His signature in Items 55 and 57 also contain the incorrect last name.

In January 1976, the applicant’s birth certificate was provided to the Enlisted Records Center, Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana, and a records correction action was taken. This correction modified the last name recorded in the applicant’s records to the one recorded in his birth certificate and which he now claims is correct.

On 25 February 1976, the applicant was honorably discharged after completing
5 years, 8 months, and 29 days of his 6 year enlistment in order to immediately reenlist. The DD Form 214 issued to him for this period of service contains the last name recorded in his birth certificate, and which he now claims is correct. His record shows that during this enlistment he completed a second tour in the RVN, and his separation document lists the following awards: Expert Infantryman Badge (EIB); Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM); RVNCM with
60 Device; Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross (RVNGC) with Palm; VSM; and NDSM.

On 19 February 1980, the applicant completed his last 3 year, 11 month, and
24 day period of active duty service when he was honorably discharged. The
DD Form 214 issued to for this period of service contains the last name recorded in his birth certificate in Item 1 (Name). In addition, the applicant signed this document using the correct last name in Item 21 (Signature of Member Being Separated). This document also lists the following awards in Item
13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized-all periods of service): NDSM; VSM; RVNCM; EIB; AGCM
(3^rd Award); RVNCG with Palm; and Sharpshooter Badge (M-16 Rifle).

On 9 March 1998, as a result of action taken by this Board, a correction to the applicant’s separation document (DD Form 215) was issued by the Army Review Boards Support Division, St. Louis, Missouri. This correction amended Item
13 of the applicant’s 19 February 1980 DD Form 214 by deleting the VSM and adding the following awards: PH with 1^st Oak Leaf Cluster (OLC); VSM with
1 silver and 1 bronze service star; and CIB.
As indicated in the Board’s decisional document of 15 July 1998, there is no indication in the applicant’s personnel record that shows he was ever recommended for or awarded the ARCOM.

DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1. The Board notes and understands the applicant’s desire to have the last name recorded in his 1969 and 1970 separation documents changed to reflect the name recorded in his birth certificate. It is clear that the last name recorded in the documents in question was not the applicant’s correct last name, as evidenced by the records correction accomplished by the Army in 1976 and by his birth certificate. It is also evident that the last name recorded in these documents was the last name under which the applicant entered active duty and reenlisted for those particular periods of service.

2. The Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy 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. While the Board understands the applicant’s desire to now record his correct last name in the separation documents in question, it finds no evidence that suggests that the applicant has or would suffer any injury or injustice as a result of the Army maintaining these documents as they were correctly prepared at the time.

3. The Board wishes to advise the applicant that a copy of this decisional document along with his application and the supporting evidence he provided, which confirms his correct last name, will be filed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). This along with the other correction documents completed by the Army should serve to clarify any questions or confusion in regard to the difference in the name recorded in the separation documents in question, and satisfy his desire to have his correct last name properly documented in his OMPF.

4. The Board also notes applicant’s request to have the CIB, PH, and ARCOM added to his 7 April 1969 DD Form 214. However, the evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s record has already been corrected to add the
PH with 1^st OLC and the CIB, which properly credits him with earning these awards. Therefore, the Board finds no further effective relief would be gained by adding these particular awards to his 1969 separation document.

---

5. In addition, as indicated in the previous Board decision in this case, the applicant’s record contains no evidence that suggests that he was ever recommended for or awarded the ARCOM. Further, the applicant has failed to provide any independent evidence to support his claim of entitlement to this award. Therefore, the Board concludes that there is insufficient evidence to support granting this requested relief.

6. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________ ________ ________ GRANT

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__JNS __ __INW __ __JAM __ DENY APPLICATION

                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002072611
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	2002/08/15
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1980/02/19
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200
DISCHARGE REASON	Time Remaining
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 2	100.0100
2. 66	107.0020
3.
4.
5.
6.