IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  14 DECEMBER 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100015591 


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 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to add the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM) for his participation in Operation Urgent Fury (Grenada).

2.  The applicant states he believes he should have been awarded the AFEM for his service in Panama during the period June 1981 through June 1984, which includes his participation in Grenada during the period 23 October through 
21 November 1983.  

3.  The applicant provides:

* A copy of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 14 April 1985
* A copy of a DA Form 2166-6 (Enlisted Evaluation Report (EER)) for the period February 1983 through January 1984

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.  His records show he initially enlisted in the U.S. Air Force (USAF) for a period of 4 years on 3 July 1973.  After his honorable discharge from the USAF, he enlisted in the U.S. Army for a period of 4 years and entered active duty on 
10 May 1977.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty 96D (Image Interpreter).  

3.  A copy of his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) shows in item 35 (Record of Assignments) he was assigned to the 193rd Military Intelligence Company, Fort Clayton, Panama during the period 23 June 1981 through 19 June 1984.  There are no entries indicating his participation in Operation Urgent Fury, Grenada.

4.  The applicant provides a copy of his EER for the period February 1983 through January 1984.  Part II (Evaluation of Professionalism and Performance), item c (Demonstrated Performance of Present Duty) states, in pertinent part, “Being a member of the first imagery intelligence (IMINT) team assigned to support U.S. Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) operations, he was directly responsible for many top quality intelligence products.  He produced numerous initial IMINT reports of new targets which provided responsive support to Central Intelligence Command South (CINCSOUTH).  His input, dedication and sound judgment has played an integral part in the accomplishment of Detachment I’s mission.”

5.  The EER failed to reveal sufficient evidence that shows the applicant’s actual participation in “Operation Urgent Fury.”   His military personnel record is also void of any evidence which shows his participation in this operation.  

6.  His DD Form 214 shows he was honorably released from active duty on 
14 April 1985 and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement).  He completed 4 years active service and 4 years, 1 month, and 28 days of prior active service with no lost time.  His record also shows he was later appointed as a USAR Warrant Officer under Title 10, U.S. Code on 30 April 1985.

7.  Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) shows he was awarded the following:

* Meritorious Service Medal
* Army Good Conduct Medal (2nd Award)
* National Defense Service Medal
* Army Service Ribbon
* Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon 
* Overseas Service Ribbon
* Army Commendation Medal
* Army Achievement Medal
* Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M16)

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, for award of the AFEM 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 the requirements to be a bona fide member in a unit and to be engaged in the operation, or serve in the area of operations, or be engaged in direct support of the operation provided this support involves entering the area of operations, being engaged in combat, participation as a member of an aircraft flying in support of the operation, or being recommended or attached to a unit recommended for award of the medal if the above criteria have not been met.  

9.  The designated military operations and dates of eligibility for award of the AFEM are specified in Army Regulation 600-8-22.  This regulation shows that the AFEM was authorized for participation in Operation Urgent Fury in Grenada during the period 23 October 1983 to 21 November 1983.  Qualifying service for non-unit direct support personnel in Grenada is 6 consecutive days or 12 non-consecutive days.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the AFEM for Operation Urgent Fury, Grenada was carefully considered.

2.  By regulation, the AFEM was authorized for service between 23 October 1983 and 21 November 1983, dates inclusive and is based on time served in a qualifying area.  The applicant has failed to provide sufficient evidence which shows his actual participation in this operation.  Without deployment orders or other documentation showing he was serving in the capacity as direct support personnel, there is insufficient evidence to grant the requested relief. 

3.  The applicant is advised that if he can provide documentary evidence that shows he served in Grenada, he may reapply to the Board for reconsideration of this issue.  


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X___  ___X____  ____X___  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.




      _______ _  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)                                         AR20100015591





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100015591



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1