Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007441
Original file (20080007441.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
 
		IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	     18 September 2008  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080007441 


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 her DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) be corrected by showing all awards that she is authorized and by showing her maiden name. 

2.  The applicant states, "My uniform has more ribbons…than what's showing on my DD 214."  She also states that her name was changed due to a 1984 divorce. 

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentation. 

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 enlisted and entered the Regular Army on 17 September 1976 using the last name of G____.   She completed military police training and served in Germany as a customs inspector from November 1974 until her release from active duty.  

3.  United States Army Europe and Seventh Army Special Orders Number 298, dated 25 October 1974, changed her last name to M____ because of marriage.

4.  The applicant's authorized awards are shown in item 9 (Awards, Decorations and Campaigns) of her Personnel Qualification Record- Part II (DA Form 2-1) as the National Defense Service Medal and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar.  Her DD Form 214 shows the same awards.  There are no available orders or any other evidence showing she is authorized any additional awards.

5.  On 13 September 1976 she was separated from active duty with an honorable characterization of service and transferred to the United States Army Reserve using her married name.    

 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no available evidence to support the conclusion that the applicant was authorized or awarded any awards that are not shown on her DD Form 214. 

2.  The applicant's name was officially changed due to marriage while she was on active duty.  A post-active duty divorce is not sufficient to change the applicant’s name on her DD Form 214.  The Army has an interest in maintaining the integrity of its records for historical purposes.  The data and information contained in those records should actually reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created.

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








BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__X_____  ____X___  ___X___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.




      _______ _ 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)                                         AR20080007441



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080007441



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013098

    Original file (20100013098.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record confirms the applicant served under the same last name of B---------d from 24 February 1976 when her last name changed by reason of marriage, through 1 April 1987 when she divorced and elected not to change her last name, until she retired from active duty on 30 April 1997 under the same last name. The applicant is advised that a copy of this decisional document along with her application and the supporting evidence she provided, which confirms her current full name,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013040

    Original file (20140013040.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 March 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140013040 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's request for correction of her DD Form 214, for the period ending 2 November 2002, to show her last name as "W----r" instead of "C----r" was carefully considered. The applicant is advised that a copy of this decisional document will be filed in her military records.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003571

    Original file (20140003571.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, correction of the military records of her former spouse, an enlisted member of the Retired Reserve, to show that he changed his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) from spouse coverage to former spouse coverage within 1 year of their divorce. In a letter dated 20 September 2013, the applicant was advised by DFAS that at the time of her divorce she had 1 year in which to deem an election for the SBP. The applicant contends, in effect, that the military records of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008244

    Original file (20090008244.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, correction to the records of her deceased former spouse, a former service member (FSM), to show he elected Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) former spouse coverage. There is no evidence the FSM submitted a request to change his SBP election from spouse to former spouse coverage as a result of their divorce. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the FSM concerned be corrected by: a. showing the FSM changed his SBP coverage...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019395

    Original file (20100019395.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of her records to show her last name as Brxxxxxx-Spxxxxx instead of Spxxxxx on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). There is no evidence of record or independent evidence that suggests the last name recorded on the applicant's DD Form 214, dated 13 August 1994, exhibits a material error or injustice. While the applicant provides a court document, filed on 6 December 1999, showing her last name of Spxxxxx was changed to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100015534

    Original file (20100015534.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Public Law 99-661, dated 14 November 1986, permitted divorce courts to order SBP coverage (without the member’s agreement) in those cases where the retiree had elected spouse coverage at retirement or was still on active duty and had not yet made an SBP election. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1450(f)(3)(A) permits a former spouse to make a written request that an SBP election of former spouse coverage be deemed to have been made when the former spouse is awarded the SBP annuity incident to a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005542

    Original file (20080005542.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 May 1981, the applicant and the FSM were divorced. A letter, dated 2 February 2006, from the applicant to DFAS requested the applicant receive monthly payments based on the FSM's SBP election at the time of his retirement. The applicant and the FSM were divorced on 14 May 1981.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002247

    Original file (20090002247.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Considering all the evidence and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law, and regulations, it is concluded that the document provided by the applicant is insufficient to warrant a change to the name recorded in her military service records and on her discharge document. In this regard, the evidence of record shows that the applicant’s military...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012705

    Original file (20060012705.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 April 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060012705 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. The applicant requests the following items to be corrected on her DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty): Item 1 (Last Name- First Name- Middle Name) to show her first and last name as M____ O____W_____...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013477

    Original file (20090013477.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The FSM and the applicant were divorced on 12 August 2004. After their divorce in August 2004, the FSM continued to pay SBP spouse coverage premiums until his death even though he was not required to do so. Considering there is evidence to show it was the FSM's intent to provide SBP coverage for the applicant, his former spouse, it would be equitable to correct his records to show he changed his SBP spouse coverage to former spouse coverage within a timely manner and that she be paid the...