RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 June 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070001608 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 Ms. Joyce Wright Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas Chairperson Mr. Edward E. Montgomery Member Ms. Rea M. Nuppenau 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 name be changed to reflect the name change that was approved in the Circuit Court of Hillsborough, Florida. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that he is asking that his name be changed based on his Final Decree on file in the state of Florida. 3. The applicant provides a copy of the Final Decree Changing Names, dated 2 March 2000, from the Circuit Court of Hillsborough, Florida, in support of his request. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 25 February 1969. The application submitted in this case is dated 18 October 2006 and was received for processing on 16 January 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 military record shows that he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 13 November 1967. 4. The applicant was honorably released from active duty for hardship reasons on 25 February 1969, after serving 1 year, 3 months, and 13 days of active service. He was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve with a termination date of 12 November 1973. 5. The military documents that are on file in the applicant’s OMPF (Official Military Personnel File) show that the applicant served and was released from active duty under the name of Boulah **** instead of the name Han**. 6. For historical purposes, the Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records. The data contained in those records should reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant was inducted in the United States Army on 13 November 1967 under the last name of Boulah****, as opposed to Han**. In reviewing the record, the applicant appropriately served on, and was separated from active duty, under the name he provided upon his entry onto active duty. There is no evidence that he attempted to change the spelling of his last name while he was in service. 2. There is no evidence, and the applicant has provided none, which would indicate that an injustice will occur if his last name is not changed as requested by him. 3. While the Board understands the applicant’s desire to have the records changed, it finds no basis for compromising the integrity of the Army’s records. 4. The Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records for historical purposes. The data 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, the Board is reluctant to recommend that those records be changed. 5. This Board action will be filed in his military records, so a record of the name annotated on the final decree from the state of Florida will be on hand. 6. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 25 February 1969 therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 24 February 1972. The applicant did not 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 __LD____ __r_____ __EM____ 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. _____LaVerne M Douglas______ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070001608 SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED 20070612 TYPE OF DISCHARGE HD DATE OF DISCHARGE 19690225 DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR 635-200 DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION GRANT REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 100 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.