RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         21 June 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070003028


      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. Sherri V. Ward                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Richard T. Dunbar             |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. David W. Tucker               |     |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 his record be corrected to
reflect his correct name.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he desires this correction for
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefit purposes.

3.  The applicant provides his separation document (DD Form 214) and birth
certificate in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 17 October 1956, the date of his separation.  The
application submitted in this case is dated 2 February 2007.

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 record shows he was inducted into the Army and entered
active duty on 25 October 1954.  A Record of Induction (DD Form 47) and
Preinduction Report of Medical Examination (SF 88) completed during his
induction processing contain the name he now claims is incorrect.  The
applicant signed documents completed during this processing using the name
listed on the DD Form 47 and SF 88.

4.  The Service Record (DA Form 24) and Enlisted Qualification Record (DA
Form 20) prepared upon the applicant's entry on active duty listed his name
as shown on the induction record, and all orders prepared on the applicant
throughout the period he served on active duty all list this same name.

5.  The applicant's record also includes several medical treatment records
and a separation Report of Medical Examination, which all list the same
name recorded on the applicant's Service Record and in the document
prepared during his induction.
6.  On 17 October 1956, the applicant was honorably separated after
completing 1 year, 11 months, and 23 days of active military service.  The
DD Form 214 issued to him at the time lists the name he now claims is
incorrect in Item 1 (Name) and the applicant authenticated this document
with his signature, which also reflected the name in Item 1 and that was
used throughout his military service.

7.  The applicant provides a Commonwealth of Puerto Rico Birth Certificate
that lists the name he now claims is correct as his full name, which
includes both the last name of his mother and the last name of his father.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that he would like his record correct to
reflect his correct name was carefully considered.  However, while the
validity of his birth certificate and the name listed is not in question,
the evidence of record confirms the applicant was inducted, served, and was
separated under the name as it is currently listed on all records and
documents contained in his Official Military Personnel File.

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.  All the applicant's records list the name listed in his Record of
Induction and Service Record, and in the signature he used throughout his
military service.  Therefore, this appears to be the name under which he
served.  Absent any evidence that he has actually been denied VA benefits
based on the name recorded in his military records, there appears to be no
compelling reason to compromise the integrity of the Army’s records to
correct the name on his separation document.

3.  This Report of Proceedings, along with the verification documents
provided by the applicant, will be filed in his Official Military Personnel
File (OMPF) to provide clarity to any confusion that might arise regarding
the difference in the name on his birth certificate and name recorded in
his military records.  Filing the Board’s decisional document will also
guarantee the historical accuracy of the applicant's military record
regarding his name.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 17 October 1956, the date of his
separation. Therefore, the time for his to file a request for correction of
any error or injustice expired on 16 October 1959.  He failed to 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

___SVW_  __RTD __  __DWT__  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.




                                  _____Sherri V. Ward_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070003028                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/06/21                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1956/10/17                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-205                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |OS Rtn                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.  1021 |100.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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