IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  27 October 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110009411 


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 award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) and the Armed Forces Service Medal (AFSM).

2.  He states that he served 3 consecutive years in the U.S. Army from June 1995 until June 1998.  For award of the AGCM, he received no nonjudicial punishments, disciplinary infractions, or court-martial offenses.  He states he served as part of the U.S. Support Group Haiti alongside cavalry scouts from his battalion (1st Battalion, 32nd Armor Regiment) during the summer of 1996 as part of Joint Endeavor; therefore, he should be awarded the AFSM.  

3.  He also states that he served in the specified area of operations during the United Nations Mission in Haiti as part of the security force.  He is unsure of the exact number of days spent in country, but he is positive his service entailed at least 60 days.  He has in his possession documentation regarding a temporary duty (TDY) travel advance voucher from the 126th Finance Battalion for food and lodging for the PRE-MAD DOG II Reconnaissance Mission.  

4.  He provides:

* DD Form 1610 (Request and Authorization for TDY Travel of Department of Defense Personnel), dated 19 July 1996
* TDY Travel Advance Voucher Summary, dated 20 July 1996
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)


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 record shows he enlisted in the Delayed Entry Program on 12 July 1994.  He enlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade E-2, on 15 June 1995, for 3 years.  He completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty 19K (M1 Armor Crewman).

3.  A DD Form 1610, dated 19 July 1996, shows he was assigned to the U.S. Support Group Haiti for TDY in various cities in and around Port-Au-Prince, Haiti, for the PRE-MAD DOG II Reconnaissance Mission for 5 days proceeding on 22 July 1996.  

4.  The TDY Travel Advance Voucher Summary that he submitted that was prepared on 20 July 1996 shows he was advanced cash for meals, incidental expenses, and lodging in Haiti.  

5.  On 16 June 1998, he was honorably released from active duty due to completion of required active service and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement).  

6.  Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 lists the following:

* Army Achievement Medal (3rd Award)
* National Defense Service Medal
* Army Service Ribbon
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar

7.  There is no evidence of any disciplinary action during his period of active service.  There also is no evidence of a commander's disqualification for the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

8.  He was honorably discharged from the USAR on 23 July 2002.

9.  On 25 October 2011, a staff member of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), Indianapolis, IN, verified that there is no evidence the applicant received hostile fire/imminent danger pay (HF/IDP) for service outside of the U.S. in 1996.  The official also stated that regardless of the TDY orders, if the applicant had been in country 1 day he would have received HF/IDP for Haiti.

10.  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.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the AGCM, disqualification must be justified.  

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 also states the AFSM may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States for operations for which no other U.S. campaign or service medal is approved and who, after 1 June 1992:

*  participate or have participated as members of U.S. military units in a U.S. military operation deemed to be a significant activity and encounter no foreign armed opposition or imminent threat of hostile action
* participate for 1 or more days in the operation within the designated area of eligibility or meet one or more of several criteria including being engaged in direct support for:

* 30 consecutive days in the area of eligibility (or for the full period when an operation is of less than 30 days' duration) 
* 60 nonconsecutive days provided this support involves entering the area of eligibility  

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 further states award of the AFSM is authorized to U.S. military participants in the following operations in Haiti:  (1) United Nations Mission in Haiti; (2) U.S. Forces Haiti; and (3) U.S. Support Group Haiti, from 1 April 1995 to 31 January 2000.

13.  Military Personnel Message (MILPER) Number 99-100 authorized award of both the Armed Forces Service Medal and the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, as a one-time exception to Department of Defense and Service policy, for qualifying service in support of Operations Joint Endeavor and Joint Guard in the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  This exception allowed both service medals to be presented to personnel deployed in Bosnia-Herzegovina during the periods 1 June 1992 to 19 December 1996 (Operation Joint Endeavor) and 20 December 1996 to 20 June 1998 (Operation Joint Guard).  The exception also allowed only one award of each service medal for service in either or both Operation Joint Endeavor and Operation Joint Guard.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The available evidence shows the applicant appears to have met the criteria for the first award of the AGCM.  There is no evidence of record which shows he was disqualified by his commander for this medal.  Therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show the AGCM (1st Award) for the period 15 June 1995 through 14 June 1998.

2.  The evidence that he provided is insufficient to show he served in Haiti or in Operation Joint Endeavor or during any other period that would make him eligible for award of the AFSM.  The available evidence does not show he received HF/IDP for Haiti or for any other area.  DFAS verified that if he served 1 day in country he would have received HF/IDP for Haiti.  Without sufficient evidence to show he met the criteria for award of the AFSM he is not entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 to show this award.

3.  In view of the foregoing, his records should be corrected as recommended below.

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 is 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 Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period 15 June 1995 through 14 June 1998 and adding this award to Item 13 of his DD Form 214.

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 award of the Armed Forces Service Medal and addition of this medal to his DD Form 214.



      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20110009411



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110009411



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1