IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	    23 January 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130008025 


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, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show he was awarded or authorized the:

* Army Service Ribbon
* Overseas Service Ribbon
* Army Good Conduct Medal
* Kuwait Liberation Medal awarded by the Government of Kuwait (KLM-K)
* National Defense Service Medal
* Kuwait Liberation Medal awarded by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
(KLM-SA)
* Southwest Asia Service Medal (SWASM) with three bronze service stars
* Army Achievement Medal (AAM)
* Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) (3rd Award)
* Presidential Unit Citation (PUC)

2.  The applicant states:

* he had numerous medals, awards, and citations left off of his DD Form 214
* in effect, he was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 67th Armor of the 3rd Armor Division at the time of the alleged error 


3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214. 

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 requested that the Army Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon, and Overseas Service Ribbon be added to his DD Form 214.  His DD Form 214 currently shows he was awarded these awards.  Therefore, this portion of the applicant's request will not be discussed further in these Proceedings.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 June 1990 for a period of 
4 years.  He completed his training and he was awarded military occupational specialty 19K (M1 armor crewman).

4.  On 21 June 1994, he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) at the completion of required active service.  His DD Form 214 shows his last duty assignment and major command was Company A, 1st Battalion, 64th Armor Regiment.  His DD Form 214 also shows he was awarded or authorized the:

* Army Lapel Button
* Army Service Ribbon
* Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award)
* National Defense Service Medal
* Overseas Service Ribbon
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar

5.  Item 12f (Foreign Service) of his DD Form 214 shows he completed 1 year, 11 months, and 27 days of foreign service.


6.  The Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) compiled the Operations Desert Shield/Desert Storm data base.  The primary Operations Desert Shield/Desert Storm file contains one record for each active duty member who participated in theater between 2 August 1990 and 31 July 1991.  This data base shows the applicant served in Southwest Asia from 1 January 1991 to
4 June 1991.

7.  He enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG) on 22 June 1994.

8.  Permanent Order Number 12-3, dated 19 September 1998, shows he was awarded the ARCOM for meritorious achievement for his part in his tank crew achieving the Top Gun award during annual training 1998.

9.  On 7 May 2004, he was honorably discharged from the ARNG for being medically unfit for retention.

10.  There are no orders in the available records and he did not provide any evidence that he was awarded or authorized the AAM or PUC during his period of active service.

11.  The U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) previously approved unit awards database does not show the 1st Battalion, 64th Armor Regiment, was cited for any unit awards while the applicant was assigned to it.

12.  There is no evidence of record that shows the applicant was assigned to the
2nd Battalion, 67th Armor.

13.  HRC's database does not show the 2nd Battalion, 67th Armor was cited for award of the PUC.  However, this unit was cited for award of the Valorous Unit Award for actions during the period 6 January 1991 to 13 June 1991 by Department of the Army General Orders Number 14, dated 11 April 1997.

14.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides Department of the Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military decorations, service medals and ribbons, unit decorations, and similar devices awarded in recognition of accomplishments.  It states:

	a.  The Southwest Asia Service Medal is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States serving in Southwest Asia and contiguous waters or airspace there over, on or after 2 August 1990 to 30 November 1995.  A bronze service star is authorized for wear with this medal for participation in each credited campaign.  Approved designated campaigns are:

* Defense of Saudi Arabia (2 August 1990 to 16 January 1991)
* Liberation and Defense of Kuwait (17 January to 11 April 1991) 
* Cease-Fire Campaign (12 April 1991 to 30 November 1995)

	b.  The KLM-SA was approved on 3 January 1992 and is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States who participated in the Persian Gulf War between 17 January 1991 and 28 February 1991.

	c.  The KLM-KU was approved on 9 November 1995 and is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States who participated in the Persian Gulf War between 2 August 1990 and 31 August 1993.

	d.  The AAM 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.

	e.  The PUC is awarded for extraordinary heroism in action.  A unit must display such gallantry, determination, and esprit de corps in accomplishing its mission as would warrant award of the Distinguished Service Cross to an individual.

15.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214 and states the DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Based on the applicant's service in Southwest Asia, he is entitled to the SWASM with three bronze service stars, KLM-SA, and KLM-K.  Therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show these awards.

2.  The DD Form 214 is a "snapshot in time" and is a reflection of the applicant's record of active Army service at the time of his REFRAD.  Since it appears he received the ARCOM after his REFRAD, there is no basis for adding this award to his DD Form 214 for the period ending 21 June 1994.

3.  There are no orders for the AAM in the available records.  Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for adding this award to his DD Form 214.

4.  Although the applicant contends he was assigned to the 2nd Battalion,
67th Armor of the 3rd Armored Division at the time of the alleged error, there is no evidence of record and he provided no evidence to support this contention.

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 adding to his DD Form 214 the:

* Southwest Asia Service Medal with three bronze service stars
* Kuwait Liberation Medal – Saudi Arabia
* Kuwait Liberation Medal – Kuwait

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 adding the Army Commendation Medal, Army Achievement Medal, or the Presidential Unit Citation 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)                                         AR20130008025



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130008025



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1