RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         09 NOVEMBER 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004104005


      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. Mark Manning                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Linda Simmons                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Leonard Hassell               |     |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 separation document be corrected to
show that he was awarded an Army Achievement Medal, a Driver’s Badge, and
that he held a Special Qualification Indicator (SQI) of “L” as part of his
military specialty at the time of his separation from active duty.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the documents to confirm the
award, badge and SQI were not available at the time of his separation.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of orders awarding him the Army
Achievement Medal, the Driver’s Badge, orders awarding his Foreign Language
Proficiency Pay in November 2000, and a copy of his October 2001 Defense
Language Proficiency Test.  He also submits a copy of a Department of
Defense Form 2566 (Verification of Military Experience and Training (VMET))
which show his qualification as a linguist from November 2000 until
February 2003.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant entered
active duty on 23 October 1998.  His enlistment documents indicate that he
was fluent in Spanish.  He was trained as a wheel vehicle repairer (63W).
On 22 February 2001 the applicant executed a 2-year reenlistment contract.

2.  In November 2000 the applicant was authorized “linguist pay” for the 12
month period commencing on 31 August 2000.  In October 2001 he successfully
passed the Defense Language Proficiency Test for Spanish proficiency and
was recommended for academic credit under the American Council on
Education.  There is, however, no indication in his Official Military
Personnel File that he was ever awarded the SQI of “L.”

3.  The VMET form, submitted by the applicant, is a tool provided to
Soldiers who are separating from the military to assist them in the
preparation of resumes and job applications.  It notes that Army training
data and experience history is extracted from the Army Training
Requirements and Resources System and from automated military personnel
files.  A transcript from the American Council on Education (ACE) Registry
Transcript System may also support the military training and experience.



4.  Army Regulation 600-200 states that the SQI is the fifth character of
the MOSC (Military Occupational Specialty Code) and identifies special
qualifications that a Soldier has.  SQI “L” identified qualified linguists.
 The regulation notes that award of an SQI must be announced in orders by
an appropriate award authority. It states that the SQI will be retained as
long as the Soldier is qualified in the skill.

5.  Department of the Army (DA) Regulation 611-6, which establishes
policies and provisions for the selection and classification of Army
linguist programs.  The regulation notes that “proficiency will be tested
annually.”

6.  In November 2001 the applicant was awarded an Army Achievement Medal
for the period 22 October 1999 to 20 November 2001.  He was awarded his
second Army Achievement Medal in January 2003 in recognition of his
meritorious service during the period 20 October 1999 to 20 February 2003.
Both awards were confirmed in orders issued by the 19th Maintenance
Battalion at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, although neither award was recorded on
his separation document.

7.  In April 2002 the applicant was awarded the Driver’s Badge with the “W”
component bar signifying his attainment of a high degree of skill in the
operation and maintenance of wheeled vehicles.  The badge was confirmed in
orders issued by the 19th Maintenance Battalion but also omitted from his
separation document.

8.  On 21 February 2003 the applicant was released from active duty with an
honorable characterization of service in pay grade E-4.  He was issued an
RE (Reentry) Code of “1” indicating that he was fully qualified for
reenlistment.

9.  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.  There is no evidence
in the applicant's official military personnel file that his commander ever
disqualified him for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.




DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence confirms that the applicant was awarded two awards of the
Army Achievement Medal and the Driver’s Badge with “W” component bar.  His
records should be corrected accordingly.

2.  The applicant completed a qualifying period of service for award of the
Army Good Conduct Medal on 22 October 2001.  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.  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 23 October 1998 through
22 October 2001.

3.  Notwithstanding the fact that the applicant’s language proficiency may
have been reflected on his VMET form, or that he may have at one time been
entitled to Foreign Language Proficiency Pay based on his fluency in
Spanish, there is no evidence that he was ever awarded an SQI of “L.”  The
information on the applicant’s VMET form may have been extracted from
information contained on the AEC document which showed that the applicant
had been granted academic credit based on his October 2001 language
proficiency test.

4.  Even though the applicant’s file contains no orders indicating he was
ever awarded the SQI, the evidence does show that the last time the
applicant passed the language proficiency test was in October 2001.  In
order to retain eligibility for SQI “L” proficiency testing was required on
an annual basis.  Unfortunately, in the absence of evidence that the
applicant tested on or after October 2002, there is no basis to correct his
records to show that he was entitled to an SQI of “L” at the time of his
separation from active duty in February 2003.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

___MM__  ___LS  __  ___LH __  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:

      a.  showing that he was awarded two awards of the Army Achievement
Medal and the Driver’s Badge with ”W” component bar; and


      b.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 23 October
1998 through 22 October 2001.

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
showing that he held an SQI of “L” at the time of his separation from
active duty in February 2003.



                                  ____   Mark Manning_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004104005                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20041109                                |
|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]