RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        3 OCTOBER 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060008680


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

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Rene’ R. Parker               |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Kenneth Wright                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Thomas Ray                    |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Sherry Stone                  |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that the spelling of his last name be changed
from "Borgman” to "Borgmann” and the Recondo Badge and Imjin Scout Award
(2nd) be added to his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active Duty).   Additionally, he requests that item 15a “contribution to
education” be changed to “Yes.”

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that “Borgman” is not the name
indicated upon naturalization.  He also states that he earned the Recondo
Badge at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.  He admitted that the actual badge and
certificate was never provided.  The applicant said that Imjin Scout Badge
indicating armed combat patrols in a once potentially defoliated area has
since been deleted.  Additionally, he maintains that his record of
education contributions does not reflect contributions made.

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214, orders, and a petition for
naturalization.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 1 July 1990.  The application submitted in this case is
dated            15 March 2006.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant's records show he was commissioned as a United States
Army Reserve Officer (USAR) on 12 August 1979 under the name of “Borgman.”
He served in the military for 10 years, 10 months, and 20 days and was
honorably discharged on 1 July 1990.

4.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows his last name as “Borgman.”  In item
15a “Member Contributed to Post-Vietnam Era Veterans’ Educational
Assistance Program” is checked “No.”
5.  The applicant provided a copy of orders that show he was honorably
discharged from the Ready Reserve effective 24 July 1992.

6.  The applicant provided a “New York Petition for Naturalization” form
from the internet.  This is an unofficial and unverified form completed by
the applicant.  This form shows the family name as “Borgmann.”

7.  The applicant's record shows that he signed numerous documents,
including his DA Form 428 (Application for Identification Card) and medical
documents using the name "Borgman.”

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy,
criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military
awards.  This regulation also provides a list of all U.S. Army decorations
medals, badges, citations, and campaign ribbons authorized and the order of
precedence.

9.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations) in effect at the time,
established standardized procedures for preparation and distribution of the
       DD Form 214.  The regulation states, in pertinent part, to list in
item 13 all decorations, medals, badges, citations, and campaign ribbons
awarded or authorized as listed from Army Regulation 600-8-22 for all
periods of service in the priority sequence.

10.  Veterans' Educational Assistance Program (VEAP) was available to
Soldiers who entered active duty between 31 December 1976 and 1 July 1985
and elected to make contributions from their military pay to participate in
this education benefit program.  The government matched their contributions
on a $2 for $1 basis.

11.  Army Regulation 635-5 states if a Soldier contributed to VEAP and did
not get money back, mark "YES."  For those who entered before 1984,
contributed to VEAP, and received their money back, mark "NO."


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Evidence of record shows that the applicant served in the Army for more
than 10 years with the spelling of his name as "Borgman.”  In the absence
of a birth certificate or official documentation verifying the “correct”
spelling of his last name there is an insufficient basis to approve his
request.  Therefore, the name contained on the applicant’s DD Form 214 is
correct as constituted.

2. The military awards regulation does not show the award of the Recondo
Badge or the Imjin Scout Award (2nd).  Therefore, these awards are not
authorized to be listed on the applicant’s DD Form 214.

3.  There is no evidence, and the applicant did not provide any, to show
that he contributed to VEAP and did not get money back as required for an
entry of "YES" to be entered on his separation document.  In view of this
fact, there is insufficient basis to correct his separation document.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in
error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would
satisfy that requirement.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 1 July 1990; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on         30 June 1993.  The applicant did not file within the 3-
year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation
or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___KW __  __TR ___  ___SS __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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.






2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




                                  _____ Kenneth Wright________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060008680                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061003                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.00                                  |
|2.                      |107.00                                  |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]