BOARD DATE:	  13 May 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090019516 


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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) to show his correct name and type of discharge.

2.  The applicant does not provide an explanation regarding the reason for his request.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his birth certificate and a letter reply from National Personnel Records Center (NPRC).

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's requests a change of the type of his discharge listed on his DD Form 214; however, he fails to explain what error or injustice he believes exists on the type of discharge, the authority and reason for his separation, or of what remedy he is specifically seeking.  Presumably, he is requesting correction of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 29 September 1975 since his three prior DD Forms 214 were all issued by reason of immediate reenlistment.  Absent any indication of error or injustice related to this issue, or of a specific relief requested from the applicant, there is insufficient information with which to render a fair and impartial decision on this matter.  The applicant has been advised of this in a separate letter.  As a result, this issue will not be discussed further in these Proceedings.

3.  The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 November 1961.  The DD Form 4 (Enlistment Contract - Armed Forces of the United States) completed for this enlistment lists the last name as "S----c" in item 1 (Last Name - First Name - Middle Name), which he now claims is incorrect.

4.  On 13 August 1964, the applicant was discharged for immediate reenlistment. The DD Form 214 he was issued lists the name he now claims is incorrect in item 1 (and the DD Form 4 prepared for this reenlistment also lists the name he now claims is incorrect in item 1).

5.  On 25 June 1970, the applicant was discharged for immediate reenlistment.  The DD Form 214 he was issued lists the name he now claims is incorrect in item 1 (Last Name - First Name - Middle Name) and the DD Form 4 prepared for this reenlistment also lists the name he now claims is incorrect in item 1.

6.  On 3 March 1971, the applicant was discharged for immediate reenlistment.  The DD Form 214 he was issued lists the name he now claims is incorrect in item 1 and the DD Form 4 prepared for this reenlistment also lists the name he now claims is incorrect in item 1.

7.  On 29 September 1975, the applicant was honorably retired under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), paragraph 5-8e(2), by reason of temporary disability and placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL).  The DD Form 214 he was issued lists the name he now claims is incorrect.  The applicant's OMPF is void of any documentation that lists his name as "S---------i," the name he now claims is correct.

8.  The applicant provides a copy of his birth certificate and an NPRC letter, dated 9 November 2009, that list the name he now claims is correct.


9.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separations Documents) prescribes the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  In pertinent part it states the DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that his records should be corrected to show his correct name has been carefully considered.  However, the evidence is not sufficient to support this claim.

2.  While the copy of his birth certificate and the NPRC letter he provides show the name he now claims is correct, his OMPF shows he enlisted, served, and was separated from service under the name he now claims is incorrect.

3.  For historical purposes, 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.  In the absence of a showing of material error or injustice, there is a reluctance to recommend that those records be changed.  While it is understandable the applicant desires to now record his correct name in his military records, there is not a sufficiently compelling reason for compromising the integrity of the Army’s records at this late date.

4.  The applicant is advised that a copy of this decisional document along with his application and the supporting evidence he provided, which confirms his correct name, will be filed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).  This should serve to clarify any questions or confusion in regard to the difference in the name recorded in his military record and to satisfy his desire to have his correct name documented in his OMPF.

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)                                         AR20090019516



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090019516



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1