IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  22 February 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110012437 


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 the following awards:

* Army Commendation Medal
* Army Achievement Medal (2nd Award)
* Army Good Conduct Medal
* "Combat Jump wings" annotated by bronze service star

2.  The applicant states he has orders for some of the awards and papers which show he earned other medals for his honorable service.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents:

* National Personnel Records letter, dated 23 September 2004
* 2nd Infantry Training Brigade, Individual Infantry Training Diploma, dated 4 May 1989
* United States Army Infantry School, Airborne Course Diploma, dated 26 May 1989
* Letter of Recommendation
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* 82d Airborne Division Combat Mission Certificate, dated 20 December 1989
* Letter of Recommendation, dated 1 February 1992
* Partial copy of DD Form 638 (Recommendation for Award of LOM and Below) for a Army Achievement Medal for the period 1 May 1989 to 1 May 1991
* An Army Achievement Medal Certificate, dated 1 May 1991
* Permanent Orders Number 16-20, dated 15 February 1990

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 the Regular Army on 31 January 1989.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman).  He received an honorable discharge on 30 January 1992.  The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he completed 3 years of creditable active service during this period.

3.  The DD Form 214 issued at the time of his discharge shows:

	a.  item 12f (Foreign Service) 7 months and 14 days of service;

	b.  item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized):

* Army Service Ribbon
* Army Lapel Button
* National Defense Service Medal
* Southwest Asia Service Medal with two bronze service stars
* Parachutist Badge
* Rifle (M16) Marksman
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Bronze Service Star for Parachutist Badge
* Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (Panama)

	c.  item 18 (Remarks) he served in Southwest Asia from 20 August 1990 to 3 April 1991.

4.  Permanent Orders Number 16-20, dated 15 February 1990 awarded the applicant a bronze service star for Parachutist Badge for participation in a combat parachute jump effective 20 December 1989.  Based on this information, the applicant has been given proper credit for his combat jump in Operation Just Cause and is annotated on his DD Form 214.  Therefore, this issue will not be further addressed.

5.  Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 does not reflect award of the Army Commendation Medal nor do his records contain official orders awarding him the Army Commendation Medal.

6.  The applicant provided a incomplete photocopy of a DD Form 638 which shows he was recommended for award of the Army Achievement Medal for the period 1 May 1989 to 1 May 1991.  The form shows the basis for the recommendation is the applicant's deployment in support of Operation Just Cause in Panama.

7.  The applicant also provided a photocopy of the Army Achievement Medal Certificate, dated 1 May 1991.  This certificate stated the applicant distinguished himself with outstanding service during the period of 1 May 1989 to 1 May 1991.

8.  A review of the applicant's service record shows no derogatory information in the form of time lost, nonjudicial punishment, or suspension of favorable personnel actions which would disqualify him for the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  Additionally, there are no entries in his record to indicate his commanders denied him award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Army Commendation Medal may be awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the Army after 6 December 1941, distinguishes himself or herself by heroism, meritorious achievement, or meritorious service.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Army Achievement Medal is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States, who while serving in a noncombat area on or after 1 August 1981, distinguished themselves by meritorious service or achievement.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Army Good Conduct Medal 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 Army Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request that his DD Form 214 be corrected to show the missing awards which he has earned while in service.  The awards requested by the applicant were carefully considered and determined to have partial merit. 

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant served honorably on active duty during the period 31 January 1989 through 30 January 1992 and he was  advanced in rank three times during this period.  His record is void of any evidence that shows he had time lost or that he received nonjudicial punishment or court-martial action.  There is also no evidence of a suspension of favorable personnel actions or a commander's disqualification for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  Lacking any derogatory information which would have precluded the applicant from being awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal it would be appropriate to award him the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period 31 January 1989 through 30 January 1992 and to correct his DD Form 214 to show this award.

3.  Records show the applicant was awarded the Parachutist Badge for a combat jump during the time frame of the Army Achievement Medal requested.  Based on award of the Parachutist Badge and evidence provided by the applicant which indicated he was recommended for award of the Army Achievement Medal and there is no record of the recommendation being denied, there is sufficient evidence to show that he is entitled to award of the Army Achievement Medal.

4.  There is no evidence in his records nor did the applicant provide any documentation to show he was recommended or awarded the Army Achievement Medal (2nd Award).  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to grant award of the Army Achievement Medal (2nd Award).

5. The applicant's record is void of evidence and he has not provided sufficient evidence, such as official orders, which show he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to grant award of the Army Commendation Medal.


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:

   a.   awarding him the Army Achievement Medal (1st Award) and the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period 31 January 1989 through 30 January 1992;

b. adding to item 13 of his DD Form 214 the:

* Army Achievement Medal 
* Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award)

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented was 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 the Army Commendation Medal and the Army Achievement Medal (2nd Award).  




      _______ _   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)                                         AR20110012437



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110012437



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1