RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  27 February 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060010030 


	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.


X

	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 report of separation (DD Form 214) dated 12 March 1954 be corrected to reflect his correct place of birth as “Sabina, Ohio”, his award of the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), and that he be awarded the Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL). 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that due to poor administrative procedures, his place of birth was incorrectly entered as “Sabanna, Ohio” when in fact it is “Sabina, Ohio.”  He further states that he is entitled to award of the NDSM and that his character of service indicates that he willingly complied with the demands of the military environment, that he was loyal and obedient to superiors and that he faithfully supported the goals of his unit and the Army.  Accordingly, his service qualifies for award of the GCMDL. 

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a letter from the National Personnel Records Center informing the applicant that he qualifies for award of the NDSM. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which occurred on 12 March 1954.  The application submitted in this case is dated 6 July 2006.

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’s military records are not available to the Board for review.  A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members’ records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  It is believed that the applicant’s records were lost or destroyed in that fire.  However, there were sufficient documents remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.

4.  The applicant initially served in the Ohio Army National Guard (non-federalized) from 22 September 1947 until he was discharged on 21 September 1950.
5.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 March 1951 for a period of 3 years and was promoted to the pay grade of E-2 on 7 April 1951.  He completed the tractor-scraper operators course at Fort Belvoir, Virginia in 1953, was advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 18 September 1953, and it appears that he was transferred to Germany, where he served for 11 months and 4 days.

6.  On 12 March 1954, he was honorably discharged at Camp Kilmer, New Jersey, due to the expiration of his term of service (ETS).  He had served 2 years, 11 months, and 28 days of total active service and had 2 days of lost time due to absence without leave (AWOL).

7.  His DD Form 214 issued at the time of his discharge indicates in item 11 that his place of birth was “Sabanna, Ohio.”  In item 27, under Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized is the entry “None.”

8.  A search of towns and cities in Ohio indicate that there is no such town or city of “Sabanna”; however, there is a listing for the town of “Sabina”.

9.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided policy and criteria concerning individual military decorations.  It stated that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940 and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  At the time, a Soldier's conduct and efficiency ratings must have been rated as "excellent" for the entire period of qualifying service except that a service school efficiency rating based upon academic proficiency of at least "good" rendered subsequent to 11 November 1956 was not disqualifying.  However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority announced the award in General Orders.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) as amended provides 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, 2 August 1990 through 30 November 1995 and 11 September 2001 to a date to be determined.
  




DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that his place of birth as listed on his DD Form 214 is incorrect appears to have merit.  All of the available documents contained in the reconstructed records indicate that his place of birth was “Sabina, Ohio” and since there is no listing of a town of “Sabanna, Ohio”, it is reasonable to presume that an administrative error was the resultant cause of the applicant’s place of birth being incorrectly entered.  Accordingly, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to reflect that his place of birth is “Sabina, Ohio.” 

2.  The applicant is entitled to award of the NDSM for his service during the period in question and since action has already been taken to issue him that award, it would be appropriate to add the NDSM to his records at this time.  

3.  There is insufficient evidence in the available records to determine what the applicant’s conduct and efficiency ratings were during his service.  Therefore, it must be presumed that the applicant’s commander did not recommend him for award of the GCMDL and the applicant has failed to show sufficient evidence to establish his qualifications for that award.  Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to award him the GCMDL at this time.  

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 12 March 1954; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on
11 March 1957.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations; however, based on the available (evidence or argument), it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case.

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 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 showing that his place of birth is “Sabina, Ohio” and that he was awarded the NDSM. 

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 GCMDL.




_____ X________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060010030
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070227
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         1.110.0000
189/CORR 214
2.107.0069
115/NDSM
3.107.0056
102/GCMDL
4.

5.

6.