IN THE CASE OF: . BOARD DATE: 19 MARCH 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080018943 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 that his 1977 DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) be corrected to reflect award of the Jungle Expert Badge, the Army Good Conduct Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, and the Overseas Service Ribbon. He also asks, in effect, that item 9 (Awards, Decorations and Campaigns) on his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) be corrected to show that he qualified as sharpshooter with the .45 caliber pistol vice as an expert, and as an expert with the M-60 machine gun vice as a sharpshooter. He also asks that item 35 (Record of Assignments) on that same form be corrected to show that he served as the assistant armorer and armorer during his last year of assignment with Company A, 3rd Battalion, 5th Infantry prior to being released from active duty in June 1977. 2. The applicant states he was awarded the U.S. Army’s Jungle Expert Badge upon successful completion of the Army’s Jungle Warfare Training Program at the Jungle Warfare Training Center, Fort Sherman, Panama but no longer has any evidence of completing the training or the award. He states he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal just prior to his release from active duty. 3. The applicant also states, in effect, that information contained on his DA Form 2-1 regarding his qualification level with the .45 caliber pistol and M-60 machine gun is incorrect and that his duty as the assistant armorer and armorer with his unit in Panama was omitted. 4. The applicant states, in effect, that he believes he is entitled to the Army Service Ribbon and Overseas Service Ribbon because, as a member of the State of Connecticut Organized Militia he was “ordered into State Active Duty.” 5. The applicant provides a copy of his 1977 DD Form 214, his DA Form 2-1, and a copy of the orders ordering the Organized Military to state active duty in August 2008 for militia annual training. 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. Records available to the Board indicate the applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Delayed Entry Program (DEP) in February 1974 until 27 June 1974, at which time he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty as an enlisted Soldier on 28 June 1974. He was trained as an infantryman in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (infantryman) and ultimately assigned to Company A, 3rd Battalion, 5th Infantry, in Panama in February 1975. 3. In September 1975 the applicant was promoted to the rank of specialist four (SP4)/E-4. His records contain four performance evaluation reports covering the period February 1975, when he was initially assigned to Panama, through June 1977 when he was released from active duty. Each of the evaluation reports are complimentary and range in scores from 118.5 to 124.5 out a possible 125. There is no evidence in the applicant’s available file of any lost time, derogatory information, or evidence his commander denied award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. As of April 1977 the applicant was on a promotion standing list for promotion to sergeant (SGT)/E-5. 4. There is no evidence confirming completion of Jungle Warfare Training. 5. The applicant remained in Panama for the duration of his enlistment contract and on 20 June 1977 he was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) to complete his remaining Reserve obligation. 6. The order the applicant provides to support his contention that he was ordered to active duty was issued by the State of Connecticut and notes that personnel of the Organized Militia ordered into State active duty are treated as State Employees for the purpose of Federal/State income. The Connecticut Organized Militia comprises the state's military department, which also includes the Connecticut Army and Air National Guards. The Organized Militia consists of four units, two companies of the Governor’s Foot Guard and two companies of the Governor’s Horse Guard, with a combined strength of 320 militia members. The Organized Militia, when required, act as ceremonial escorts for the Governor, and support other ceremonial and civic activities, including open horse shows, parades, and scholastic programs. 7. The DA Form 2-1 provides a record of individual personnel management qualifications such as grade, skills, physical limitations, and assignment history and is used primarily by personnel managers at unit level to support the Army’s personnel life-cycle function of sustainment. Once an individual has been released from active duty or discharged the form is no longer active. 8. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time when the service member was discharged, required that throughout a qualifying period of service for award of the Good Conduct Medal the enlisted person must have had no convictions by a court-martial. This period is 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military service. In addition, an individual was required to show that he/she willingly complied with the demands of the military environment, had been loyal and obedient, and faithfully supported the goals of his organization and the Army. Today, Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), which replaced Army Regulation 672-5-1, notes that there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal and disqualification must be justified. Current practice requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits the individual to respond. 9. Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided policy and criteria concerning combat and special skill badges. It stated that combat and special skill badges are awarded to denote proficiency in performance of duties under hazardous conditions and circumstances of extraordinary hardship as well as special qualifications and successful completion of prescribed courses of training. Major commanders were authorized to approve for local adoption and temporary wear special skill subdued cloth badges and, when authorized, cloth badges were worn on the field and work uniforms only and not authorized for wear on the service uniform nor could they interfere with the insignia or other items approved by Headquarters, Department of the Army. The Jungle Expert Badge was not listed as an authorized award. 10. Army Regulation 600-8-22 shows that the Overseas Service Ribbon and Army Service Ribbon were established by the Secretary of the Army on 10 April 1981. The regulation states, in pertinent part, that effective 1 August 1981, all members of the Active Army, Army National Guard, and Army Reserve in an active Reserve status are eligible for award of the Overseas Service Ribbon for successful completion of overseas tours. The Army Service Ribbon is awarded to members of the US Army for successful completion of initial entry training. Both awards may be awarded retroactively to those personnel who were credited with a normal overseas tour completion and completion of initial entry training prior to 1 August 1981 provided they had an Active Army status, as defined above, on or after 1 August 1981. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. Since the DA Form 2-1 is not normally accessible by individuals other than the Soldier after release from active duty or discharge there is no basis or reason to correct the DA Form 2-1. As such, the applicant is not entitled to correction of his DA Form 2-1. 2. While the sincerity of the applicant's claim that he was awarded the Jungle Expert Badge is not in doubt, there is no evidence in the applicant's records, and the applicant failed to provide any evidence that he was awarded the Jungle Expert Badge. Even if the applicant had in fact completed Jungle Warfare Training, there is no provision for adding the Jungle Expert Badge to his DD Form 214. 3. Although the applicant had overseas service in Panama and completed initial entry training, he does not qualify for the Overseas Service Ribbon or the Army Service Ribbon because he was not on active duty on or after 1 August 1981. His service as a member of the Connecticut Organized Militia is considered a state agency and as such not considered “active duty” for the purposes of meeting eligibility requirements for either ribbon. 4. A review of the applicant's records revealed no disqualifying information that would result in denial of the Good Conduct Medal to the applicant. There is no evidence indicating that he was ever disqualified from award of the Good Conduct Medal by any of his unit commanders. There is no evidence of a breach of good order or discipline in the applicant's service personnel records. It appears that the failure to award this Soldier the Good Conduct Medal was an administrative oversight and not related to anything he did to disqualify himself from this award; therefore, he is entitled to award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 28 June 1974 through 20 June 1977. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ___X_____ ____X____ ___X_____ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 28 June 1974 through 20 June 1977 and adding this award to his DD Form 214. 2. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to award of the Jungle Expert Badge, Overseas Service Ribbon, Army Service Ribbon, and correction of entries on his DA Form 2-1. _________XXX_____________ 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) AR20080018943 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080018943 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1