| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Hubert S. Shaw, Jr. | Analyst |
| Mr. Luther L. Santiful | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | |
| Ms. Terry L. Placek | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of his records to show the National Defense Service Medal, the Overseas Service Ribbon, the Army Service Medal and the Good Conduct Medal.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he is entitled to these awards which are not shown on his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of three years and entered active duty on 22 March 1977. He served until he was separated prior to completion of his enlistment with a General Discharge Certificate under the provisions of paragraph 13-4c of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of unsuitability (apathy, defective attitude or inability to expend effort constructively).
The applicant completed 1 year, 8 months, and 12 days of active service and had 26 days lost due to being absent without leave.
The applicant’s DD Form 214 does not show the National Defense Service Medal, the Overseas Service Ribbon, the Army Service Medal and the Good Conduct Medal as authorized awards.
The applicant’s DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record-Part II) does not show any entries in item 5 (Oversea Service) or any entries for awards or decorations in item 9 (Awards, Decorations and Campaigns).
There is no indication in the applicant’s personnel records that he received or was denied award of the Good Conduct Medal. His service personnel records show that he received non-judicial punishment two times, administered by a field grade officer, for offenses of being absent without leave. The applicant’s records also show that he received five adverse counseling statements during the period 13 September 1978 to 21 November 1978 for demonstrating defective attitudes and inaptitude for Army life and for failure to repair.
Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 27 July 1950 through 27 July 1954, 1 January 1961 through 14 August 1974, and 2 August 1990 through 30 November 1995.
Army Regulation 600-8-22 shows that the Overseas Service Ribbon was 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 the award for successful completion of overseas tours. The award may be awarded retroactively to those personnel who were credited with a normal overseas tour completion before 1 August 1981 provided they had an Active Army status on or after 1 August 1981 and the overseas service is not recognized with another U.S. service medal. Numerals are used to denote the second and subsequent awards of the Overseas Service Ribbon.
Army Regulation 600-8-22 shows that the Army Service Ribbon was 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 the award upon successful completion of initial entry training. This award may be awarded retroactively to those personnel who completed the required training before 1 August 1981 provided they had an Active Army status on or after 1 August 1981.
Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service. 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. Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.
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 applicant’s active duty service occurred during the period 22 March 1977 through 29 December 1978 which is not during a period when the National Defense Service Medal was awarded. Therefore, the applicant is not eligible for award of the National Defense Service Medal.
2. There is no evidence, and the applicant has provided no evidence, which shows that he served a period of qualifying service for award of the Overseas Service Ribbon. Therefore, he is not eligible for award of the Overseas Service Ribbon.
3. There is no evidence, and the applicant has provided no evidence, which shows that he served a period of qualifying service for award of the Army Service Ribbon. Therefore, he is not eligible for award of the Army Service Ribbon.
4. There is no evidence the applicant was considered for or denied award of the first award of the Good Conduct Medal. However, the Board noted the applicant’s absences without leave, counseling statements, and the fact that he was separated from the service for unsuitability based on apathy, defective attitude and the inability to expend effort constructively. In view of these facts, the Board determined that the applicant’s conduct, efficiency and fidelity did not warrant award of the Good Conduct Medal.
5. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the either requirement.
6. 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.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR201062826 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020108 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | MR CHUN |
| ISSUES 1. | 107.0000.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062826C070421
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of his records to show the National Defense Service Medal, the Overseas Service Ribbon, the Army Service Medal and the Good Conduct Medal. There is no evidence, and the applicant has provided no evidence, which shows that he served a period of qualifying service for award of the Overseas Service Ribbon. There is no evidence, and the applicant has provided no evidence, which shows that he served a period of qualifying service for award of the Army Service Ribbon.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012256
On 26 August 1981, the applicants immediate commander initiated a Bar to Enlistment/Reenlistment Certificate against the applicant citing his three instances of nonjudicial punishment and extensive history of counseling. This form further shows he completed 4 years and 9 months of creditable active military service. XXX _________________________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010181
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 26 July 1982, the applicant was discharged with a discharge under honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-4C, for unsuitability – apathy, defective attitude, or inability to expend effort constructively. The applicant provided two copies of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 26 July 1982.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010181C080213
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant provided two copies of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 26 July 1982. Army Regulation 635-5 prescribes the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010181
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant provided two copies of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 26 July 1982. __x_____ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070010181 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20071030 TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION GRANT REVIEW AUTHORITY Ms. Mitrano ISSUES 1.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006882
Consistent with the chain of command's recommendations, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of unsuitability and directed issuance of a general discharge under honorable conditions. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 29 July 1982. His general discharge is commensurate with his overall record of military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017368
The applicant requests, in effect, an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. The applicant's records do not show any significant achievements/accomplishments during this period of military service. On 6 August 1982, the applicants immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with paragraph 13-4c of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016558
The applicant requests the narrative reason for separation be removed from his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). The regulation states the reason for discharge based on separation code "JMJ" is "unsuitability apathy, defective attitude or inability to expend effort constructively" and the regulatory authority is Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-4c. The applicant's narrative reason for separation was administratively correct and in conformance with...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002997
The applicant requests his general, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 13 July 1982, the applicant's unit commander notified him of pending separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, for unsuitability - apathy, defective attitudes, or inability to expend efforts constructively. There is no evidence of record which indicates the actions taken in this case were in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014289
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. The regulation stated that when separation for unsuitability was warranted an honorable or general discharge would be issued as warranted by his military record. Since the applicants record of service included two nonjudicial punishments and 61 days of lost time, his record of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and...