RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        10 July 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060017156


      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.

|     |Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano          |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Kathleen A. Newman            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Susan A. Powers               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Edward E. Montgomery          |     |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, in effect, that the name and gender in her
military records be corrected.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she respectfully requests  her
name and gender be corrected to reflect her true identity based on the
enclosed documentation.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of her
application:  Name Change Court Order; Passport Identification (ID)
Section; Driver's License; Social Security Number Card; MEDICARE ID Card;
Medical ID Card; and Birth Certificate.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that 15 December 1969, the date of her separation.  The application
submitted in this case is dated 3 December 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 record shows the applicant was appointed a Reserve Officer of the
Army, in the rank of second lieutenant (2LT), on 2 June 1962, and that he
entered active duty in that status on 11 June 1963.  The appointment
documents on file confirm the applicant's first name was Richard and his
gender was male at the time of his appointment.

4.  The applicant's Officer Qualification Record (DA Form 66), which was
prepared on 8 June 1965 and last audited by the applicant on 19 October
1968,  lists the first name Richard in Item 1 (Name).  All documents and
orders on file in the applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ)
containing a name show the first name Richard.  All medical treatment
records on file show the applicant's first name as Richard and gender as
Male.

5.  The applicant's record also contains two Reports of Medical Examination

(SFs 88).  These documents were completed on 3 December 1968 (POR) and 15
December 1969 (Separation), and both list the applicant's first name as
Richard in Item 1 (Name) and his gender as Male in Item 7 (Sex).

6.  On 15 December 1969, the applicant was honorably discharged after
completing a total of 6 years, 6 months, and 5 days of active military
service.
The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant at the time lists the first name
Richard in Item 1 (Name) and applicant authenticated this document with a
signature in Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Transferred or Discharged).
 The applicant's signature in Item 32 contains the first name Richard.

7.  The applicant provides a court order issued by the Superior Court of
California on 25 June 1973, which ordered the applicant's first name
changed to Diane.  She also provides passport, medical and social security
ID cards that all list her first name as Diane and her gender as female.
The applicant provides no medical evidence confirming that she actually
underwent medical therapy for a gender change into the female role.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that the first name and gender listed in the
military records should be changed to reflect her true identity was
carefully considered.  However, while the applicant's desire to change the
military record to show the first name and gender she currently being used
is understood, there is insufficient evidence to support granting the
requested relief.

2.  The applicant was appointed a commissioned officer of the Army, served,
and was separated using the first name Richard as a male, which is properly
recorded in the military records.  The fact that subsequent to service, the
applicant has changed her first name and gender does not provide a
sufficiently mitigating basis for changing the information recorded in the
military records, which was correct at the time the applicant performed
military service.

3.  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 have the
records changed, it finds no compelling reason for compromising the
integrity of the Army’s records at this time.

4.  This decisional document, along with the documents submitted with the
application, will be filed in the applicant’s Official Military Personnel
File (OMPF). This should clarify the applicant's current use of the first
name Diane and the female gender, and should assist in avoiding any
confusion and conflict in the record that could result from the applicant's
current use of a different first name and gender.  Had the applicant
provided medical evidence confirming that she actually underwent medical
therapy for a gender change into the female role,  although it still would
not result in a change to the military record, it is possible the Board
would have recommended a Transcript of Military Record (DA Form 1569) be
issued reflecting the applicant's current name and gender.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 15 December 1969, the date of
discharge.  Therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for
correction of any error or injustice expired on 28 May 1986.  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

__KAN __  __SAP __  __EEM__  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.




                                  _____Kathleen A. Newman___
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060017156                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/07/10                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1969/12/15                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-120                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Resignation                             |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.1100                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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