RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            03 August 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20060000574


      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. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Margaret Patterson            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Michael Flynn                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Gerald Purcell                |     |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 he be awarded the Armed Forces
Expeditionary Medal (AFEM).

2.  The applicant states that he was serving in the United States Army
Reserve (USAR) with the 404th Signal Company when he was called to active
duty with his unit because of the Berlin Crisis in October 1961.  He goes
on to state that he served on active duty for 10 months until the Berlin
Crisis ended in August 1962 and he believes he is entitled to the award of
the AFEM for that period.

3.  The applicant provides a letter of explanation of his application and
copies of his reports of separation (DD Form 214).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 14 August 1962.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 23 December 2005.

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.  The applicant was inducted in Des Moines, Iowa, on 2 December 1958.  He
completed his training at Fort Hood, Texas and was transferred to Germany
on 22 April 1959.

4.  He was assigned to the 2nd Medium Tank Battalion, 66th Armor Regiment
and was advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 3 August 1959.  He remained in
Germany until he was returned to Fort Hamilton, New York on 23 August 1960.


5.  On 3 September 1960, he was honorably released from active duty
(REFRAD) for the purpose of returning to college.  He had served 1 year,
9 months and 2 days of total active service.  He was transferred to the
USAR Control Group to complete the remainder of his statutory service
obligation.

6.  On 14 October 1961, while assigned to the 404th Signal Company in
Waterloo, Iowa, he was mobilized with his unit with instruction to report
to Fort Huachuca, Arizona.  He remained at Fort Huachuca until his unit was
demobilized and was returned to its parent station.

7.  Accordingly, he was honorably REFRAD on 14 August 1962 and was returned
to his home station with his unit.  He had served 10 months of active
service during this period and his DD Form 214 issued at the time of his
REFRAD reflects that he received no awards.  He was honorably discharged
from the USAR on 30 November 1964.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part,
for award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for qualifying service
after 1 July 1958 in U.S. military operations, U.S. operations in direct
support of the United Nations, and U.S. operations of assistance to
friendly foreign nations.  Qualifications for this award includes the
requirements to be a bona fide member in a unit engaged in the operation or
to serve in the area of operations for 30 days, or to be engaged in direct
support of the operation for 30 consecutive or 60 nonconsecutive days
provided this support involves entering the area of operations.  The
regulation also provides that the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal may be
awarded if the individual served the full period in cases when the
operation is less than 30 days in duration, if the individual is engaged in
actual combat with armed opposition regardless of the period of service, if
the individual participates as a member of an aircraft flying in support of
the operation, or if the individual is recommended (or attached to a unit
recommended) for award of the medal if the above criteria have not been
met.  The designated dates of eligibility for this award during the Berlin
Crisis consisted of service in Berlin from 14 August 1961 to 1 June 1963.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) as amended provides that the
National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) is awarded for honorable active
service for any period between 27 July 1950 through 27 July 1954, 1 January
1961 through 14 August 1974, 2 August 1990 through 30 November 1995 and
11 September 2001 to a date to be determined.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  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 this requirement.


2.  While the applicant was mobilized with his unit during the Berlin
Crisis, the evidence of record shows that he was never deployed to the area
of operation that qualified for award of the AFEM.  His records indicate
that he remained at Fort Huachuca for the entire duration of his
deployment.

3.  Therefore, lacking evidence to show that he deployed to Berlin during
the period in question, there appears to be no basis to award him the AFEM
at this time.

4.  However, the evidence of record does show that he should have been
awarded the NDSM for his service during the Berlin Crisis.  Accordingly, it
would be in the interest of justice to do so at this time.

5.  Evidence shows that the applicant’s records contain administrative
error which does not require action by the Board.  Therefore,
administrative correction of the applicant’s records will be accomplished
by the Case Management Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as
outlined by the Board in paragraph 3 of the BOARD
DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 14 August 1962; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 13 August 1965.  The applicant did not file within the
3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation
or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____MP _  ___MF__  ___GP __  DENY APPLICATION





BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.

3.  The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the
individual should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the
CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual
concerned by awarding him the NDSM and correcting his records to show that
award.





                                  ____Margaret Patterson____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060000574                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060803                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD)                                    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19620814                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 135-205                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |REFRAD                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY W/NOTE)                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES                  |118/AFEM                                |
|1.107.0072              |                                        |
|2.107.0069              |115/NDSM                                |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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