BOARD DATE:	  7 June 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110024778 


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 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to add award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) and Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM).

2.  The applicant states these awards were omitted from his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence.

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 was inducted into the Army of the United States on 3 October 1958 and was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty 310.00 (Field Ammunition Crewmember).

3.  The applicant's DA Form 24 (Service Record) for the period 3 October 1958 through 2 October 1960 shows he served in Germany from 21 March 1959 through 21 September 1960.  Section 1 (Appointments, Promotions, and Reductions) shows he was advanced to private first class on 9 June 1959 and this is the highest rank he attained and held while serving on active duty.  Section 1 also shows he was reduced to private/E-2 for cause on 19 September 1960.

4.  Section 4 (Chronological Record of Military Service) of his DA Form 24 shows he served with Battery B, 1st Observation Battalion, 26th Artillery, during his assignment to Germany.  Section 4 further shows that during this assignment, he received "good" conduct and efficiency ratings for the period 21 May through 20 September 1960.  Section 9 (Medals, Decorations, and Citations) shows he earned the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar during his active duty tenure.  No other awards or decorations are recorded in section 9.

5.  On 4 October 1960, the applicant was honorably released from active duty after completing 2 years and 2 days of active military service.  His DD Form 214 does not list the AGCM and AFEM as authorized awards.

6.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, stated the AGCM was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940; for the first award only, 1 year served entirely during the period 7 December 1941 to 2 March 1946; and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  The enlisted person must have had all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the AFEM is authorized for qualifying service after 1 July 1958 in military operations within specific geographic areas during specified time periods.  An individual who was not engaged in actual combat or equally hazardous activity must have been a bona fide member of a unit participating in or be engaged in the direct support of the operation for 30 consecutive or 60 nonconsecutive days provided this support involved entering the area of operations.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 defines "area of operation" as the foreign territory upon which troops have actually landed or are present and specifically deployed for the direct support of the designated military operation; adjacent water areas in which ships are operating, patrolling, or providing direct support of operations; and the airspace above and adjacent to the area in which operations are being conducted.  "Direct support" is defined as services being supplied to participating forces in the area of eligibility by ground units, ships, and aircraft provided it involves actually entering the designated area of eligibility.  This includes units, ships, and aircraft providing logistic, patrol, guard, reconnaissance, or other military support within the designated area of eligibility.  "Area of eligibility" is defined as the foreign territory on which troops have actually landed or are present and specifically deployed for the operation; adjacent water areas in which ships are operating, patrolling, or providing direct support of the operation; and the air space above and adjacent to the area in which operations are being conducted.

9.  Table 2-2 of Army Regulation 600-8-22 identifies designated U.S. military operations that support award of the AFEM.  There is no AFEM authorization for Germany with the exception of Berlin during the period of the applicant's assignment.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request to add the AGCM and AFEM to his DD Form 214 has been carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support his request.

2.  By regulation, in order to qualify for the AGCM during the applicant's period of service, a member must have received all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings.  In this case, the evidence of record confirms the applicant received less than "excellent" ratings during the period 21 May through 20 September 1960 while serving in Germany.  As a result, he is not eligible for award of the AGCM.

3.  The evidence also confirms the AFEM was not authorized for service in Germany during the period of the applicant's assignment.  Therefore, there is also an insufficient evidentiary basis to support adding this award to his DD Form 214.

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 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)                                         AR20110024778



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110024778



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1