IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	        19 AUGUST 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080008740 


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, that his records be corrected to show his service in the Dominican Republic in 1965 and his awards of the Expert Infantryman Badge (EIB), the Combat Infantryman Badge, and any other awards he is entitled to as a result of his service in the Dominican Republic.  He also request that he be paid Foreign Service Pay with interest and that his completion of the personnel school be added to his records. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was assigned to the 82nd Airborne Division and deployed to the Dominican Republic in support of Operation Power Pack in 1965.  He also states that since that deployment he has experienced fever chills and high temperatures.  He also injured his knees while operating under hostile conditions and is trying to receive compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).  He goes on to state that he was serving as a supply sergeant when he jumped off a moving vehicle when it came under fire. He was sent back to the United States for discharge and no records followed him. 

3.  The applicant provides a handwritten explanation of his application. 

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

1.  Counsel requests, in effect, that the Board resolve the applicant’s issues in his favor. 

2.  Counsel states, in effect, that the applicant has amply stated his issues and has provided the probative facts needed for an equitable review by the Board. 

3.  Counsel provides no additional documents. 

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 enlisted in Fargo, North Dakota on 20 June 1962, for a period of 3 years.  He completed his basic combat training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri; his advanced individual training (AIT) as a light weapons infantryman at Fort Polk, Louisiana; and his airborne training at Fort Benning, Georgia before being transferred to Fort Bragg, North Carolina for his first and only permanent duty assignment. 

3.  He arrived at Fort Bragg on 28 December 1962 and was assigned to an infantry company of the 2nd Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment (PIR), 82nd Airborne Division.  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 22 October 1963.

4.  On 27 March 1964, he was transferred to Fort Jackson, South Carolina on temporary duty orders to attend the Personnel Administration Specialist AIT Course for a period of 8 weeks.

5.  He returned to Fort Bragg on 25 May 1964 and on 11 September 1964 he was assigned the duties of a personnel specialist.  On 3 November 1964, he was assigned the duties of a gunner and on 20 November 1964, he was promoted to the pay grade of E-5.

6.  On 11 December 1964, he was assigned the duties of a supply sergeant and on 27 April 1965, he attended a 2-day unit supply course.

7.  On 26 April 1965, the 82nd Airborne Division received orders to deploy forces to the Dominican Republic.  The initial deployment of 82nd Airborne Soldiers came on 30 April 1965 and the two battalions of the 504th PIR followed on 3 May 1965, landing at San Isidro Air Base to perform both military and humanitarian missions in support of Operation Power Pack.  The 504th PIR did not return to Fort Bragg until the summer of 1966.  

8.  On 13 May 1965, the applicant made an administrative/non-tactical parachute jump at Fort Bragg from a C119 aircraft.  On 21 May 1965, he made another administrative/non-tactical jump at Fort Bragg from a C123 aircraft.

9.  On 28 May 1965, the applicant turned in his TA-50 (Table of Allowances-50 [issued individual equipment, also known as field gear]) to the Central Issue Facility (CIF) at Fort Bragg.

10.  On 18 June 1965, the applicant was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) at Fort Bragg, due to the expiration of his term of service (ETS) and transferred to the United States Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement).  He has served 2 years, 11 months and 29 days of total active service and his DD Form 214 indicates that his only award was the Parachutist Badge.  It indicates that he had no foreign service and that he did not attend any service schools or training courses.

11.  The applicant’s medical records were not present for review by the staff of the Board as they had been transferred to the Department of Veterans Affairs – Fort Snelling, St Paul, Minnesota on 18 April 1989.

12.  A review of the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) shows that the applicant was awarded the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-1), the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14) and Pistol Bar (.45 Caliber), and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16).  Additionally, the applicant was eligible for award of the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM).  However, there is no evidence in the applicant’s records to show that he was awarded the EIB or the CIB or that he actually deployed to the Dominican Republic in support of Operation Power Pack.  His records also show that he had excellent conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service and are void of any derogatory information that could serve to disqualify him for award of the Good Conduct Medal. 

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL) 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.  

14.  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.  

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and procedures concerning awards.  Paragraph 8-6 provides for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.  That paragraph states that there are basically three requirements for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.  The Soldier must be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, he must be assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and he must actively participate in such ground combat.  Specific requirements state, in effect, that an Army enlisted Soldier must have an infantry or special forces specialty, satisfactorily performed duty while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry, ranger or special forces unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in active ground combat.  Eligibility for Special Forces personnel (less the Special Forces medical sergeant) accrues from 20 December 1989.  Retroactive awards for Special Forces personnel are not authorized.  A recipient must be personally present and under hostile fire while serving in an assigned infantry or Special Forces primary duty, in a unit actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy.

16.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and procedures for awards.  In pertinent part, paragraph 8-8 provides for award of the Expert Infantryman Badge.  Award of the Expert Infantryman Badge requires that an individual must have satisfactorily completed the prescribed proficiency tests while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of at least battalion size.  To be eligible for testing and award of the Expert Infantryman Badge, a Soldier must be in an active Army status and must have an infantry or Special Forces specialty.  The EIB must be announced/authorized in Special Orders.
 
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  While the sincerity of the applicant’s contention that he deployed to the Dominican Republic with his unit in 1965 is not in doubt, the applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application and the evidence of record, sufficient evidence to support his contention.  
2.  The evidence of record shows no indication of his deployment and his records indicate that his unit deployed to the Dominican Republic on 3 May 1965.  His records also show that he performed two parachute jumps at Fort Bragg on 13 May and 21 May 1965.  On 28 May 1965, he turned in his field gear to the CIF and on 18 June 1965, he was REFRAD.  Therefore, in the absence of conclusive evidence to establish the dates of his deployment, there appears to be no basis to grant him credit for duty in the Dominican Republic or any other benefits associated with such service (pay and awards).     

3.  The applicant’s contention that he was awarded the EIB and CIB have also been noted; however, there is no evidence to show that the applicant was awarded either of those awards or that he was entitled to receive those awards.  Accordingly, there is no basis to award them to him.

4.  The applicant’s contention that his attendance at the Personnel Administration Specialist Course should be reflected on his records has been noted and found to have merit.  Accordingly, that information should be entered on his records at this time along with his awards of the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-1), the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14) and Pistol Bar (.45 Caliber), and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16).

5.  Additionally, the evidence of record shows that the applicant was entitled to award of the NDSM and it appears that he should have been awarded the GCMDL for the period of 20 June 1962 to 18 June 1965.  Therefore, it must be presumed that the failure to award him the GCMDL was the result of an administrative error.  Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice to award him the NDSM and the GCMDL for the period of 20 June 1962 to 18 June 1965.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

__XXX __  __XXX__  __XXX__   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: 

	a.  showing that he completed the Personnel Administration Specialist Course at Fort Jackson, South Carolina from March to May 1964 and that he was awarded the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-1), the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14) and Pistol Bar (.45 Caliber), and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16); and

	b.  awarding him the NDSM and the GCMDL for the period of 20 June 1962 to 18 June 1965, while serving in the rank of sergeant (SGT).   

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 crediting him for service in the Dominican Republic, awarding him the EIB and the CIB, and granting him any additional benefits that would accrue as a result of service in the Dominican Republic (pay and additional awards).

3.  The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to the United States.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.



      ___        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)                                         AR20080008740



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080008740



6


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1