IN THE CASE OF:	  

	BOARD DATE:	  

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080002387 


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, in effect, reconsideration of her earlier request to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to show that she was awarded the Expert Infantryman Badge (EIB) and correction of her records to show her legal name.  The applicant also requests award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM), for her service in Panama, in support of Operation Just Cause.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the Board failed to award her the EIB.   She also states that she did not receive the AFEM for her service in Panama in support of Operation Just Cause.

3.  In an additional statement, the applicant stated that per letter, dated 23 November 1989, the EIB was to be awarded upon completion of the Armor Force Program of Excellence.  She states that she should be awarded the Panama Expeditionary Medal (sic AFEM) for service in Operation Just Cause based on a letter from her sister, regarding her knowledge of her service in Operation Just Cause.  She requests an updated DA 1569 (Transcript of Military Record) as her birth records clearly state her new name.

4.  The applicant provides a copy of a memorandum, dated 23 November 1989, in support of her request.


CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20070000386 on 13 September 2007 and by Docket Number AR20060004440 on 7 November 2006.

2.  The Board concluded, in Docket Number AR20060004440, that the applicant's claim of entitlement to the EIB based on completion of MOS (military occupational specialty) 19D, Cavalry Scout, training was also carefully considered.  However, by regulation, in order to qualify for the EIB, a member must be in an active Army status and must possess a primary MOS in career management field 11 (Infantry), and must meet all prerequisites and proficiency tests prescribed by the United States Infantry Center by testing with an infantry unit of at least battalion size.

3.  The applicant's MPRJ (Military Personnel Records Jacket) was void of any documents indicating that she completed the required EIB prerequisites and proficiency tests by testing with an infantry unit of at least battalion size, or that show she was ever awarded the EIB by proper authority while serving on active duty.  Further, as indicated by the applicant, she was training in MOS 19D at the time she believed she completed the requirements for the EIB.

4.  As a result, absent any evidence of record showing the applicant was ever awarded the EIB by proper authority while serving on active duty, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support granting this award was not satisfied in this case.

5.  The Board concluded, in Docket Number AR 20070000386, that the applicant was issued a DA Form 1569 in October 2000, which appropriately indicated her name as M________A_____ S____O____ at that time.  On 6 January 2006, the applicant changed her name to M_____ J_____ D____, which is her current legal name.    

6.  The applicant's new argument, as stated in her request, is the same as the argument she presented previously.  She also included in her new argument award of the AFEM for her service in Panama in support of Operation Just Cause.

7.  A review of the applicant's record and previous Docket proceedings show that she served in Panama, with the 4th Battalion, 6th Infantry Regiment, 5th Infantry Division, in support of Operation Just Cause.
8.  The applicant provided, as new evidence, a copy of a memorandum from the Commander, Headquarters, 6th Squadron, 16th Cavalry, 1st Armor Training Brigade, US Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, dated 23 November 1989.  The letter identified the applicant as being enrolled in the "Armor Force Program of Excellence" for training within [his] MOS.  This program allowed the training unit to identify those Soldiers who, through demonstrated performance and test scores, has exhibited a potential to excel as scouts and leaders.  The letter elaborated on the additional training that individuals were provided.

9.  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 for friendly foreign nations.  Qualifying service for this award includes participation in Panama in support of Operation Just Cause from 20 December 1989 through 31 January 1990.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s new argument, which was the same as the argument she previously provided the Board, was carefully considered.

2.  Documentation presented as new evidence indicated that she was enrolled in the "Armor Force Program of Excellence" for expanded training within her MOS.  However, this evidence does not support award of the EIB and there is insufficient evidence to change the Board’s prior determination.

3.  The argument regarding the applicant’s name change was considered.  On 6 October 2006, she changed her name to M_____ J_____ D____, which is her current legal name. In the absence of showing material error or injustice, the applicant’s records should not be changed. 

4.  While the Board understands the applicant's desire to have her current legal name changed on her records, there was no error or injustice that existed in this case.  The applicant’s circumstances are comparable to a female Soldier who marries and divorces several times after separation.  The military records are not changed after each marriage/divorce to reflect the Soldier’s new name.  Therefore, there was no basis for granting her request.

5.  The applicant’s requested award of the AFEM for her service in Panama in support of Operation Just Cause was carefully considered and found to have merit.  A review of her records and previous Docket proceedings show that she served in Panama with the 4th Battalion, 6th Infantry Regiment, 5th Infantry Division, in support of Operation Just Cause.  Therefore, she is entitled to correction of her records to show award of the AFEM and that this award be added to her DD Form 214.

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.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding the applicant the AFEM and adding this award to her DD Form 214.

2.  The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice regarding award of the EIB.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20060004440, dated 7 November 2006.



      _________x___________
             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)                                         AR20080002387



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080002387



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1