MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            3 October 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000040703

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

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Member	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A -  Application for correction of military 
                             records
	Exhibit B -  Military Personnel Records (including
	                  advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, reconsideration of his request to have his military records corrected to reflect his official name change.  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he has attempted to get the name contained in his military records corrected since 1970, with no success.  He encloses a copy of a letter issued by the staff of this Board on 8 September 1999 which administratively closed his case based on the lack of sufficient records. He contends that he has been unable to receive benefits to which he is entitled because his military records do not reflect his correct name and that this correction is necessary for him to obtain health care and other benefits for which he is eligible.  His expanded argument is contained in his enclosed statement along with his notarized statement and other documents related to his name change.   

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  

The applicant's military records were not available for review.  However, the evidence or record does include two Department of Defense (DD) Forms 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).  Both forms were authenticated by the applicant with his signature on the date he was issued them upon his separation from the respective period of active duty. 

The first DD Form 214 verifies that he served on active duty for 1 year, 
11 months, and 17 days, between 18 August 1959 and 4 August 1961, and that he was honorably separated, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of early release of overseas returnee.  

The second DD Form 214 is only partially legible and difficult to read; however, it appears to indicate that, while a member of the United States Army Reserve (USAR), he served a second period of active duty of 9 months and 6 days, between 28 October 1961 and 3 August 1962.  In addition, it clearly shows that he was honorably separated from this active duty period, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of early release of Reserve personnel and units.  

The evidence or record also includes a DD Form 303a (Discharge-Armed Forces of the United States) which confirms that he was honorably discharged from the Army of the United States on 31 July 1965.  

The applicant provides a notarized sworn statement in which he states that, in effect, his name was changed as a result of two Court Decrees issued by the Superior Court of Puerto Rico, Caguas Section.  The first decree was labeled Civil Case Number 66-237 and was dated 24 June 1966.  The second decree was listed as Civil Case Number 68-1319 and was dated 20 May 1968.    

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The Board noted the applicant’s contention that he is being denied benefits based on the name in his records being incorrect.  However, there is no evidence to suggest this claim has merit.  

2.  The court documents authorizing the applicant’s name change should reflect the name under which his military service was performed, as well as his new name.  Therefore, presentation of these documents in concert with appropriate military records would serve to confirm his military service for the purpose of determining his entitlement to service related benefits.

3.  The applicant’s own evidence pertaining to his name change confirms that the first action taken in this regard did not take place until 1966, a year after his honorable discharge, and nearly four years subsequent to his separation from his last period of active duty.  In addition, the final court action did not take place until 1968 some three years after his discharge and eight years after he completed his last active duty service.  

4.  In the applicant’s case, the military records on file on the date his honorable discharge was issued in 1965 reflect the correct name under which military service was performed.  This includes the records created in 1959, the year he originally entered active duty, and the records maintained for his second period of active duty that began in 1961.

5.  For historical purposes, the Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records.  The information contained in those records should reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created.  

6.  For clarity purposes, this decisional document along with the supporting material will be filed in the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File and the applicant will be issued a transcript of military records to reflect his current name. 

7.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

NOTE:  The Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA), St Louis will be requested to furnish the applicant a DARP Form 3069 (Transcript of Military Records) showing the current name, social security number and other information as applicable.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___js ___  ___rjw  __  __rtd  ___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000040703	
SUFFIX		
RECON	1999/10/01	
DATE BOARDED	2000/10/03	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1965/07/31	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	Release of Reserve Unit	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  2	100.0100	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.