BOARD DATE: 18 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000109 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___x_____ __x______ ___x__ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 18 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000109 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined 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. BOARD DATE: 18 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000109 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 military record to show his correct last name as Kxxxxxxxxxxx instead of Jxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx. 2. The applicant states he received restoration of his former name because of a dissolution of marriage judgement. 3. The applicant provides copies of his: * California Driver’s License * Superior Court of California Judgement of Dissolution 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. On 10 August 1985, the applicant was commissioned a second lieutenant in the Army of the United States, completed his oath of office, and entered active duty. The active duty order published and DA Form 71 (Oath of Office) completed at that time list his last name as “Kxxxxxxxxxxx.” 3. A DA Form 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report) completed on 1 September 2011, rating the applicant during the period 5 April 2010 to 4 April 2011, lists his last name as Jxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx. All documents contained in his record issued prior to the issuance of this OER lists his last name as Kxxxxxxxxxxx and those prepared subsequent to the issuance of the OER list his last name Jxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx. 4. The applicant was honorably retired from active duty in the rank of colonel (COL/O6) on 28 February 2014. The DD Form 214 issued to him at that time lists his last name as "Jxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx" and he authenticated this document by digitally signing that same last name. 5. He provides a copy of Superior Court of California (County of Riverside) Dissolution Judgement issued on 16 July 2015 and a copy of his California driver’s license issued on 21 October 2015. These two documents both lists his last name as Kxxxxxxxxxxx, which he now claims is correct. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) at the time established the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. The regulation directs, in pertinent part, that the purpose of the separation document is to provide the individual with documentary evidence of his or her military service. It is important that information entered on the form should be complete and accurate. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends his military record requires correction to restore his last name to Kxxxxxxxxxxx following a dissolution of marriage judgment dated 16 July 2015. The evidence of record confirms that subsequent to the applicant’s name change to "Jxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx" between 5 April 2010 – 4 April 2011, he continually served under this name and he authenticated all documents by signing this same name when required to do so, through the date of his retirement from active duty. Absent any evidence to the contrary, the evidence of record shows he chose to use the last name "Jxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx," which he held through his REFRAD. Accordingly, it is the name shown on his DD Form 214. 2. For historical purposes, the Army has an interest in maintaining the integrity 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. 3. He is advised that a copy of this decisional document will be filed in his OMPF. This should serve to clarify any questions or confusion regarding the difference in the names recorded in his military records and to satisfy his desire to have his true name documented in his OMPF. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000109 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000109 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2