RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        28 JUNE 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040006624


      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             |
|     |Ms. Deborah L. Brantley           |     |Senior Analyst       |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Joe Schroeder                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Lawrence Foster               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Jeanette McCants              |     |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 that his 1982 separation document be corrected
to reflect award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, completion of the Jungle
Warfare Training Course, any unit citations he might be entitled to, and
that his United States Army Reserve time was extended until 29 June 1988.

2.  The applicant states the information is incorrect on his separation
document and that it was overlooked.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his Jungle Warfare Training Course
completion certificate.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 17 September 1982.  The application submitted in this
case is dated is dated 23 August 2004.

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.  Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant enlisted in
the United States Army Reserve for a period of 6 years on 29 June 1979
under the Army’s Delay Entry/Enlistment Program.

4.  On 18 September 1979 the applicant executed his 3-year Regular Army
enlistment contract and entered active duty.

5.  Upon completion of training, the applicant was assigned to the 307th
Engineer Battalion which was part of the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort
Bragg, North Carolina.  He was promoted to pay grade E-4 in September 1981.

6.  In January 1982 the applicant successfully completed the Jungle Warfare
Training Course at Fort Sherman, Panama.

7.  The Jungle Warfare Training Course was a course conducted at the Jungle
Operations Training Center in Panama prior to 1999.  The course consisted
of core training of individual Soldier skills and squad collective tasks
that would be performed in a jungle environment.  These tasks included:
jungle plants and living, land navigation, mines and booby traps, jungle
combat techniques, waterborne operations, and squad react to contact live
fire lanes.  Scout, mortar, and combat engineer platoons received
additional specialized training during core week.  Situational training
exercises (STX) that included platoon deliberate attacks, raids, ambushes,
a company cordon and search, and demolition missions were also conducted as
part of the training.  A battalion field training exercise (FTX) was
conducted during the final week of the training course.  The FTX was
normally a four-day long, free-play exercise that pitted the training
battalion against a company-sized opposition force.

8.  The applicant’s file contains a May 1982 statement that the applicant
was eligible for the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 18 September
1979 through 17 September 1982.  The document requested “assistance in
obtaining the necessary actions for the award of the Good Conduct Medal.”
There are, however, no orders in the applicant’s file confirming award of
the Army Good Conduct Medal.  He had no record of any disciplinary actions
or incidents of misconduct.

9.  On 17 September 1982 the applicant was released from active duty in pay
grade E-4 with an honorable characterization of service.  Item 12i (Reserve
Obligation Termination Date) on his separation document is recorded as 28
June 1985 (6 years after his initial enlistment action).

10.  Documents in the applicant’s file indicate that he continued to serve
in the United States Army Reserve until 10 June 1988 when he was honorably
discharged.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the Army 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 Army Good
Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.  Current practice
requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable
consideration and permits the individual to respond.



12.  Army Regulation 635-5 establishes the policies and procedures for
completion and distribution of the Department of Defense Form 214
(Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).  In pertinent part
it states that item 14 (military education) will list formal in service
training courses, successfully completed during the period of service
covered, by title, length in weeks, and month and year completed.  This
information is to assist the Soldier after separation in job placement and
counseling; therefore, training courses for combat skills are not listed.

13.  A review of unit awards maintained by the Army’s Military Awards
Branch does indicate that the applicant’s unit (307th Engineer Battalion)
was awarded a Meritorious Unit Citation during the Persian Gulf War
(September 1990-May 1991).  However, there were no unit awards awarded to
the organization while the applicant was a member.  Army Regulation 600-8-
22 states that an individual is entitled to a permanent award of a unit
decoration only if the individual was a member of the organization at the
time the unit award was awarded.

14.  Public Law 98-94 outlines the statutory service obligations incurred
by individuals who enlist in the any component of the U.S. military.
Effective 1 June 1984, all personnel incur an 8-year statutory obligation
on initial entry into the Armed Forces.  Before 1 June 1984, all personnel
incurred a 6-year statutory obligation on initial entry.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant completed a qualifying period of service for award of the
Army Good Conduct Medal on 17 September 1982, when he was released from
active duty.  There is no evidence his commander ever disqualified him from
receiving the award and no evidence of any misconduct which would justify
denying him the award.  The evidence which is available suggests that
attempts were being made in May 1982 to award the applicant the Army Good
Conduct Medal.  In view of the foregoing, the Board concludes that the
applicant met the basic qualifications for award of the Army Good Conduct
Medal and it would be appropriate and in the interest of equity to award
him that decoration for the period 18 September 1979 through 17 September
1982.

2.  Although the evidence does show that the applicant completed the Jungle
Warfare Training Course, that course would have enhanced military skills
and as such, would not have been recorded on his separation document.

3.  There is no evidence that the applicant’s unit was awarded any unit
decorations while he was a member of the organization and as such, there is
no basis to correct his record to show entitlement to any unit awards.

4.  The applicant’s statutory service obligation expired on 28 June 1985, 6
years after his initial enlistment in the United States Army Reserve.  The
fact that he served beyond his statutory service obligation does not
require a correction to his 1982 separation document.  The entry on his
separation document is correct.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

___JS  __  ___LF __  ___JM  __  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 and to excuse failure to timely
file.  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 18 September 1979 through 17 September
1982.

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
an entry on his separation document regarding completion of the Jungle
Warfare Training Course; entitlement to any unit decorations; and
correction of his Reserve Obligation Termination Date to reflect his
continued service in the United States Army Reserve.




                            ______Joe Schroeder_______
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040006624                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050628                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |PARTIAL GRANT                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.00                                  |
|2.                      |110.00                                  |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]