IN THE CASE OF:	  

	BOARD DATE:	  15 May 2008

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080000418 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests correction of his records as follows:

	a.  show completion of the Ranger, Airborne, and Air Assault Courses;  

	b.  show his service in support of Operations Desert Shield/Storm during the Gulf War;  

	c.  show award o the Combat Infantryman Badge and the Good Service Medal (sic) [the Good Conduct Medal]; 

	d.  show the combat badge (sic) [the shoulder sleeve insignia for former wartime service or commonly known as the combat patch]; and 

	e.  show the correct rank/grade.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his awards and military schools are not shown on his records.  He also states that he suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), hearing loss, bilateral tinnitus, and headaches from a head injury, during his service in the Gulf War.  The applicant further questions why his medical records cannot be found.  He concludes that the correction of his records helps processing his medical case and ensures proper Veterans Administration (VA) medical treatment.   

3.  The applicant did not provide any additional documentary evidence in support of his application. 
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's records show that he enlisted in the Texas Army National Guard Regular (TXARNG) on 11 June 1989 and was ordered to initial active duty for training (IADT) on 5 July 1989.  He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 31V (Tactical Communications Systems Operator Mechanic).  He was honorably released from active duty and reverted back to his ARNG status on 26 January 1990.  The highest rank/grade he attained during this period of military service was private (PVT)/E-1.

3.  The applicant’s records further show that he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years, in the rank/grade of private (PVT)/E-2, on 29 October 1990.  He was subsequently assigned to F Troop, 2nd Squadron, 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment in Germany.  During his service in Germany, he was reduced to PVT/E-1 on 22 October 1991; but, was subsequently promoted to private (PV2)/E-2 on 1 May 1992 and to private first class (PFC)/E-3 on 1 July 1992.

4.  On 30 November 1992, the applicant was reassigned to C Company, 11th Engineer Battalion, Fort Stewart, Georgia.  He was subsequently promoted to specialist four (SP4)/E-4 on 7 January 1993. 

5.  On 26 February 1993, the applicant departed his unit in absent without leave (AWOL) status.  He returned to his unit on 26 March 1993.  

6.  On 4 May 1993, the applicant departed his unit in AWOL status again.  His records do not reveal when or how he returned to military control.

7.  On 29 June 1993, the applicant’s immediate commander initiated reduction in grade action against the applicant to the rank/grade of PVT/E-1, effective 14 May 1993.

8.  Item 17 (Civilian Education and Military Schools) of the applicant’s DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows the applicant completed the Tactical Communication Systems Operator Course and the U.S. Army Europe (USAEUR) Headstart Course in 1990.  Item 17 does not show completion of Ranger Course, the Airborne Course, or the Air Assault Course.

9.  The applicant was discharged on 21 December 1993 with an honorable character of service.  The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was honorably discharged in accordance with paragraph 16-8 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), for reduction in force.  This form further shows the applicant completed 3 years and 23 days of creditable military service and had 30 days of lost time due to AWOL.

10.  Items 4a (Grade, Rate, or Rank) and 4b (Pay Grade) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows the entries PV1/E-1.

11.  Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214, dated 26 January 1990, shows he was awarded the Army Lapel Button, the Army Service Ribbon, the National Defense Service Medal, the Overseas Service Ribbon, the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar, and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar.  Item 13 does not show award of the Ranger Tab, the Airborne Badge, the Air Assault Badge, the Combat Infantryman Badge, or the Good Conduct Medal.

12.  Item 18 (Remarks) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 does not show service in an Imminent Danger Pay/Hostile Fire Pay (IDP/HFP) area or service in Southwest Asia in support of Operations Desert Shield/Storm.

13.  The applicant’s records do not contain permanent orders awarding the applicant the Ranger Tab, the Airborne Badge, the Air Assault Badge, the Combat Infantryman Badge, or the Good Conduct Medal.

14.  The applicant’s records do not contain certificates of training showing completion of the Ranger, Airborne, or Air Assault Courses.


15.  The applicant’s records do not show the applicant was awarded any special qualification identifier (SQI) that indicates he completed the Ranger and/or Airborne Courses, or an additional skill identifier (ASI) that indicates he completed the Air Assault Course.  

16.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the Combat Infantryman Badge is awarded to infantry officers and to enlisted and warrant officer persons who have an infantry military occupational specialty (MOS).  They must have served in active ground combat while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental or smaller size.  The Awards Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (formerly known as the Total Army Personnel Command) has advised, in similar cases, that during the Vietnam era the Combat Infantryman Badge was awarded only to enlisted individuals who held and served in MOS 11B, 11C, 11F, 11G, or 11H.

17.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 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.  

18.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  The purpose of the separation document is to provide the individual with documentary evidence of their military service.  It is important that information entered on the form should be complete and accurate.  Chapter 2 of Army Regulation 635-5 contains guidance on the preparation of the DD Form 214.  Items 5a and 5b of the DD Form 214 show the active duty rank and grade at the time of the Soldier’s separation.  Item 13 shows decorations, medals, badges, citations and campaign ribbons awarded or authorized for all periods of service.  Item 14 shows formal in-service (full-time attendance) training courses successfully completed during the period of service covered by the DD Form 214, and include title, length in weeks, and the year completed.  This information is to assist the soldier in job placement and counseling; therefore, training courses for combat skills are not listed.  The regulation also states, in pertinent part, that for an active duty Soldier deployed with his or her unit during the period covered by the DD Form 214, the following statement is entered in Item 18 (Remarks):  "SERVICE IN (NAME OF COUNTRY DEPLOYED) FROM (inclusive dates for example, YYYYMMDD - YYYYMMDD)."

19.  Army Regulation 670-1 governs the requirements for wear of the shoulder sleeve insignia for former wartime service, commonly referred to as a "Combat Patch".  In pertinent part, the regulation authorizes optional wear of the U.S. Army shoulder sleeve insignia of any former wartime unit in which a Soldier served during a period of eligibility.  Periods of eligibility are announced by Department of the Army and only shoulder sleeve insignia approved for wear by Headquarters Department of the Army are authorized to be worn on the right sleeve of the Army Green and field uniforms to signify wartime service.  There are no provisions for entering the shoulder sleeve insignia for former wartime service on the DD Form 214.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his record should be corrected to show completion of the Ranger, Airborne, and Air Assault Courses; his service in support of Operations Desert Shield/Storm during the Gulf War; award of the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Good Conduct Medal, and the combat patch; and the correct rank/grade.  

2.  With respect to listing the Ranger, Airborne, and Air Assault Courses on the applicant’s DD Form 214, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant did not provide substantiating evidence that shows he completed formal training of these courses.  Furthermore, the applicant’s MOS does not show award of a SQI or ASI that could indicate he may have completed these courses. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to show these courses on the applicant’s DD Form 214 in this case.

3.  With respect to award of the Combat Infantryman Badge, there is no evidence in the available records and the applicant did not provide substantiating evidence that shows he was awarded an infantry MOS, or served in active ground combat while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental or smaller size.  Therefore, he is not entitled to award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.

4.  With respect to award of the Good Conduct Medal, the applicant’s records show that he had 30 days of lost time due to being AWOL.  Although disqualification for award of the Good Conduct Medal must be justified, it appears that the applicant’s lost time due to being AWOL disqualified him from being recommended for this award.  Regularity is presumed in the absence of the Good Conduct Medal from the applicant's authorized awards.


5.  With respect to the applicant’s rank/grade, the evidence of record shows the applicant was reduced to the rank/grade of PVT/E-1 on 14 May 1993 and that his rank and grade are properly shown on his DD Form 214.  Therefore, there is no further action required.

6.  With respect to the applicant’s service in Southwest Asia, there is no evidence in the available record, and the applicant did not provide substantiating evidence that shows he served in Southwest Asia during the Gulf War.  There are no permanent or temporary change of station orders in his records that show he served in Southwest Asia; his DA Form 2-1 does not show he served in Southwest Asia; and there is no record that shows he was awarded the Southwest Asia Service Medal.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to show the applicant's service in Southwest Asia in this case.

7.  With respect to award of the combat patch, the combat patch is an item of uniform wear, and since it cannot be determined that the applicant served in combat in Southwest Asia, he would not be entitled to wear the combat patch.  Furthermore, there is no requirement to list the combat patch on the DD Form 214, and thus no basis for granting the applicant's request to show the combat patch on his DD Form 214, even if he had served in combat.

8.  The Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) does not correct records solely for the purpose of establishing eligibility for other programs or benefits.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant did not submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement in this case. Therefore, he is not entitled to relief.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__xxx___  __xxx___  __xxx___  DENY APPLICATION





BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.



							XXX
       _    ______   ___
       CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080000418



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080000418



7


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1