PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           13 February 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002078030

	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.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Gail J. Wire		Member	
	Mr. Robert J. Osborn		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that his Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) be added to his separation document.

3.  The applicant states that this award was inadvertently omitted from his separation document.

4.  In support of his request he submits a copy of his ARCOM certificate, which shows he was given this award on 31 May 1991 for exceptionally meritorious service while assigned to C Company, 2nd Battalion, 8th Cavalry.

5.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 January 1990.  He was awarded the military occupational specialty of armor crewman, he was assigned to C Company, 2nd Battalion, 8th Cavalry, and was promoted to pay grade E-4.

6.  On 14 July 1992, the commander of C Company, 2nd Battalion, 8th Cavalry recommended that the applicant be awarded the Army Achievement Medal (AAM).  In that recommendation, his commander stated that the applicant had previously been awarded the ARCOM.

7.  On 21 December 1992, the applicant was honorably released from active duty due to failure to meet Army weight control standards.  His separation document shows his award of the AAM, but not the ARCOM.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Since the applicant was only assigned to one unit after he completed his initial entry training, the fact that his commander stated that he was previously awarded the ARCOM on his AAM award recommendation is prima fascia evidence that the ARCOM had, in fact, been awarded to the applicant.  The ARCOM certificate, showing that the applicant was awarded that decoration while assigned to C Company, 2nd Battalion, 8th Cavalry, further corroborates the applicant's contentions.

2.  The absence of the orders for the applicant's ARCOM in and of itself explains why that award wasn't entered on the applicant's separation document.  Personnel at the separation and transfer point wouldn't enter an award if they didn't have orders to confirm the soldier's entitlement to that award.  

3.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by:

a.  showing that the individual concerned was awarded the ARCOM; and

b.  adding that award to his separation document.

BOARD VOTE:  

__rjo____  ____gjw_  ____rvo__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		_________Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.______
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002078030	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020213	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.