IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  24 March 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100023180 


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:

	a.  revocation of Permanent Order (PO) 226-05, dated 14 August 2002, for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) (2nd Award) and

	b.  permanent removal of these orders from his official military personnel file (OMPF).

2.  He states PO 26-886, dated 26 January 2001, is the appropriate order for the AGCM (2nd Award) that covers the period 2 October 1997 to 1 October 2000.  PO 26-886 is already on file in his OMPF and properly reflects his actual assignment during this period.  He contends PO 226-05, dated 14 August 2002, is a duplicate award.

3.  He provided two different PO's awarding him the AGCM (2nd Award).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  His records show he is currently serving in the rank of sergeant first class and is assigned to the U.S. Army Network Enterprise Technology Command/
9th Signal Command.

2.  His record contains four DD Forms 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document – Armed Forces of the United States) and two DA Forms 1695-E (Oath of Extension of Enlistment) which show he had no break in active duty (AD) service.

	a.  He enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 6 October 1994 for 5 years.

	b.  On 1 July 1998, he extended his initial enlistment by 1 month and his new expiration term of service (ETS) date became 5 November 1999.

	c.  He reenlisted in the RA on 1 October 1999 for 3 years.

	d.  On 8 April 2002, he reenlisted again in the RA for 3 years.

	e.  On 2 March 2004, he voluntarily extended his 8 April 2002 enlistment by 1 month and his new ETS date became 7 May 2005.

	f.  He reenlisted in the RA on 1 November 2005 for an indefinite period.

3.  A review of his record shows the following awards are filed in the performance section of his OMPF:

	a.  AGCM (1st Award) for the period 6 October 1994 to 5 October 1997 per PO 029-00014 issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Signal Center and Fort Gordon, on 29 January 1998;

	b.  AGCM (2nd Award) for the period 2 October 1997 to 1 October 2000 per PO 26-886 issued by Detachment A, 516th Personnel Services Battalion, on 26 January 2001 (the period covered is not consistent with the period covered for the first award);

	c.  AGCM (2nd Award) for the period 6 October 1997 to 5 October 2000 per PO 226-05 Department of the Army Military Personnel Service Center on 14 August 2002 (this is a duplicate award; however, the period covered is consistent with the first award);

	d.  AGCM (3rd Award) for the period 6 October 2000 to 5 October 2003 per PO 314-03 issued by Office of the Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the Army on 10 November 2003; and 

	e.  AGCM (4th Award) for the period 6 October 2003 to 5 October 2006 per PO 202-29 issued by Detachment B, 516th Personnel Services Battalion, on 21 July 2006.

4.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the AGCM 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.  Discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Separations), paragraph 16-3, for immediate reenlistment is not a termination of service.

5.  Paragraph 1-18 (Duplication of Awards) of Army Regulation 635-200 states only one decoration will be awarded to an individual for the same act, achievement, or period of meritorious service.  This regulation also states that where necessary to correct conflicting or duplicate awards, previous PO's may be revoked and will be announced in PO.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  He requests to have PO 226-05, dated 14 August 2002, revoked and removed from his OMPF.  His record shows he enlisted in the RA and entered AD on 6 October 1994 with no break in AD service.

2.  He was awarded the AGCM (1st Award) per PO 029-00014, dated 29 January 1998.  These orders are consistent with regulatory guidelines and the date he entered AD.

3.  He was awarded the AGCM (2nd Award) per PO 26-886 issued by Detachment A, 516th Personnel Services Battalion, on 26 January 2001.  It appears his unit may not have been aware of the date he initially entered AD or considered the period of service for his AGCM (1st Award).

4.  Although PO 26-886, dated 26 January 2001, pre-dates PO 226-05, dated 14 August 2002, the period of service covered in PO 26-886 is incorrect.

5.  The evidence of record shows PO 226-05, dated 14 August 2002, was correctly issued and filed in his OMPF.  All subsequent awards of the AGCM are consistent with this period of service.

6.  As a result, it would be appropriate to grant him partial relief by:

	a.  revoking PO 26-886, issued by Detachment A, 516th Personnel Services Battalion, on 26 January 2001;

	b.  removing these orders from the Performance section of his OMPF; and

	c.  ensuring the revocation orders are not filed in his OMPF.



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___X____  ___X____  ____X___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined 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.  revoking PO 26-886 issued by Detachment A, 516th Personnel Services Battalion, dated 26 January 2001;

	b.  removing PO 26-886 from the performance section of his OMPF; and

	c.  ensuring the revocation orders are not filed in his OMPF.

2.  The Board further determined 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 revoking PO 226-05, dated 14 August 2002, and removing these orders from his OMPF.



      ____________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)                                         AR20100023180



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100023180



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1