RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  17 May 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060015075 


	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. Gerard W. Schwartz

Acting Director

Mr. Michael J. Fowler

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Eric N. Andersen

Chairperson

Mr. Antonio Uribe

Member

Mr. Rodney E. Barber

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, in effect, that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with the period ending 1 October 1982 be corrected to show the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge (M-16) and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Grenade). 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his DD Form incorrectly shows the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge (M-16) and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Grenade).  He states that he would like his records corrected for accuracy to show the award of the above badges. 

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentation in support of this case.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which occurred on 
1 October 1982.  The application submitted in this case is dated 17 October 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 2 October 1979 and successfully completed basic training and advanced individual training.  He was awarded military occupational specialty 94B (Food Service Specialist).

4.  The applicant was honorably separated from active duty on 1 October 1982 in the rank of Specialist Four/E-4 after completing 3 years of creditable active service with no lost time.  His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge (M-16), the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Grenade), and the Army Service Ribbon.

5.  Item 9 (Awards, Decorations and Campaigns) of the applicant's DA Form 
2-1 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows award of the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge (M-16) and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Grenade).
6.  There are no orders in the applicant's records showing award of the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge (M-16) or the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Grenade).

7.  There are no orders in the applicant's records that show he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal 1st Award.  There is no evidence of any adverse information or that his commander disqualified him for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), in pertinent part, sets forth requirements for award of basic marksmanship qualification badges.  The qualification badge is awarded to indicate the degree in which an individual has qualified in a prescribed record course, and an appropriate bar is furnished to denote each weapon with which the individual has qualified.  The qualification badges are in three classes:  Expert, Sharpshooter, and Marksman.

9.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Military Awards), 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, each Soldier had to meet all of the following criteria for the award:  The immediate commander had to evaluate the Soldier's character as above reproach; the record of service had to indicate that the Soldier had willingly complied with the demands of the military environment, had been loyal and obedient to his superiors, had faithfully supported the goals of his organization and the Army and had conducted his or herself in such an exemplary manner as to distinguish him or herself from fellow Soldiers; and the Soldier's efficiency must be evaluated as meeting all requirements and expectations for one of that Soldier's grade, military occupational specialty and experience.  However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority announced the award in General Orders.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show award of the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge (M-16) and the 

Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Grenade).  However, his DA Form 
2-1 shows he was awarded Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge (M-16) and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Grenade).  

2.  There is no evidence of record and the applicant provides none to show he was awarded the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge (M-16) or the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Grenade).  Therefore, his DD Form 214 appears to be correct.

3.  The applicant was separated in the rank of Specialist Four with three years of creditable active service with no time lost.  There is no evidence of any adverse information or that his commander disqualified him for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  Therefore, it appears the applicant met the eligibility criteria for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 2 October 1979 through 
1 October 1982 based on completion of a period of qualifying service.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 1 October 1982; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 
30 September 1985.  .  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 

__ENA __  ___AU   _  __REB__  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 1st Award for the period 2 October 1979 through 1 October 1982 and adding this award to his 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 adding the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge (M-16) and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Grenade) his DD Form 214.




_   __ Eric N. Andersen      _
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060015075
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
17 MAY 2007
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
 
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
PARTIAL GRANT 
REVIEW AUTHORITY
MR. SHATZER
ISSUES         1.
107.0110.0000
2.
107.0108.0000
3.
107.0056.0000
4.

5.

6.