RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  
 


	BOARD DATE:	  22 March 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060011206 


	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 correction of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show award of the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM), the Army Achievement Medal (AAM) (First Oak Leaf Cluster), the Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL), three Certificates of Achievement, and three Letters of Commendation.

2.  The applicant states that she was unaware these medals and awards should be reflected on her permanent record and DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214; permanent orders and award certificate for the ARCOM; two permanent orders and two award certificates for the AAM; three Certificates of Achievement; a Letter of Achievement; three Letters of Commendation; and a Letter of Appreciation.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of alleged errors which occurred 
on 7 October 1989.  The application submitted in this case is dated 8 August 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 October 1986 for a period of three years.  She completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 71L (Administrative Specialist).  

4.  She was promoted to specialist on 1 July 1988 and has no record of disciplinary actions.  There is no evidence she was disqualified by her chain of command from receiving the first award of the GCMDL.

5.  Headquarters, 13th Supply and Service Battalion Permanent Orders Number 48-1, dated 27 September 1988, awarded the applicant the AAM for meritorious achievement from 7 September 1988 through 23 September 1988.

6.  Headquarters, 7th Support Group Permanent Orders Number 5-2, dated 12 January 1989, awarded the applicant the AAM (First Oak Leaf Cluster) for meritorious achievement on 9 January 1989.

7.  Headquarters, 7th Support Group Permanent Orders Number 77-1, dated 6 September 1989, awarded the applicant the ARCOM for meritorious service from 31 March 1987 through 11 September 1989.

8.  The applicant received three Certificates of Achievement; three Letters of Commendation; and a Letter of Appreciation on various occasions between February 1987 and October 1989.

9.  The applicant was released from active duty on 7 October 1989.  She completed 3 years of active military service with no days of lost time.

10.  Her DD Form 214 shows the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon, and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge as authorized awards.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) 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.  

12.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) provides instructions for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It states, in pertinent part, that decorations, medals, citations and campaign ribbons awarded and authorized will be listed in the appropriate item of the DD Form 214.  This regulation does not authorize the listing of certificates of service or achievement and/or letters of commendation on the DD Form 214.  However, Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that certificates of achievement or certificates and other documents recognizing periods of faithful service or acts which do not meet the criteria for decorations will be distributed to the individual’s Military Personnel Records Jacket and Official Military Personnel File per Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/Records).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Permanent orders show the applicant was awarded the ARCOM for meritorious service from 31 March 1987 through 11 September 1989.  Therefore, the ARCOM should be added to her DD Form 214.

2.  Permanent orders show the applicant was awarded two awards of the AAM.  Therefore, the AAM (First Oak Leaf Cluster) should be added to her DD Form 214.

3.  There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant was disqualified from receiving the first award of the GCMDL for the period 8 October 1986 through 7 October 1989.  The applicant did not receive any disciplinary actions and was promoted to specialist during this period of service.

4.  It appears that the applicant has met the requirements for the first award of the GCMDL for the period 8 October 1986 through 7 October 1989.

5.  The applicant’s request for correction of her DD Form 214 to show that she was awarded three Certificates of Achievement and three Letters of Commendation is noted.  However, based on the governing regulation, these documents are not recorded on the DD Form 214.  

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 7 October 1989; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 6 October 1992.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations; however, based on the available evidence, 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:

	a.  awarding her the GCMDL for the period 8 October 1986 through 7 October 1989; and

	b.  adding the ARCOM, the AAM (First Oak Leaf Cluster), and the GCMDL to her DD Form 214.

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 three Certificates of Achievement and three Letters of Commendation on her DD Form 214.




x________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060011206
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070322
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
Grant partial
REVIEW AUTHORITY
Mr. Schwartz
ISSUES         1.
107.0000
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.