Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017697
Original file (20140017697.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

	

		BOARD DATE:	  9 June 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140017697 


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 item 26 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) to show a "Distinguished Soldier" commendation.

2.  The applicant states he received a letter of commendation from Major General (MG) V____ F. W____, dated 27 December 1976, designating him as a "Distinguished Soldier."  However, the commendation is not listed in item 26 of his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of the letter.

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 4 October 1974 for a period of 3 years.  He was awarded military occupational specialty 51K (Plumber).  He extended his enlistment commitment and established his expiration term of service date as 3 June 1978.

3.  The applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows in item 9 (Awards, Decorations and Campaigns) the:

* Army Good Conduct Medal
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-16) Bar

4.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was honorably released from active duty on 3 June 1978 and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement).  He had completed 3 years and 8 months of total active duty service this period.  It also shows in item 26 the:

* Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award)
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-16) Bar

5.  A review of the applicant's military personnel records failed to reveal any evidence the applicant was authorized or awarded any other awards or decorations during the period of service under review.

6.  In support of his application the applicant provides a copy of a Letter of Commendation, dated 27 December 1976, that shows the Commanding General, (MG V____ F. W____), 9th Infantry Division, Fort Lewis, Washington, commended the applicant and designated him a "Distinguished Soldier" for his outstanding achievement on 5 November 1976 when he saved the life of a member of his unit.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning military awards and decorations.   

	a.  A review of the regulation fails to show "Distinguished Soldier" as a Department of Defense or U.S. Army award or decoration.

	b.  Chapter 10 (Certificates, Memorandums, and Letters), paragraph 10-16 (Letters of commendation and appreciation), provides that acts or services which do not meet the criteria for decorations or the various authorized award certificates may be recognized by written or oral expressions of commendation or appreciation.  A written expression of commendation or appreciation will be typed on letterhead stationery and will not contain formalized printing, seals, or other distinguishing features which depart from normal letter form.  Such letters may be issued to military personnel.  Copies of each letter of commendation or appreciation will be distributed to the individual's military personnel file.

8.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge, release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army.  The regulation contains item-by-item instructions for completing the DD Form 214.  It states for item 26, list awards and decorations for all periods of Army service in the priority sequence specified in Army Regulation 600-8-22.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that the letter of commendation, dated 27 December 1976, designating him a "Distinguished Soldier" should be added to item 26 of his DD Form 214.

2.  The evidence of record shows for item 26 of the DD Form 214 the instructions are to list awards and decorations specified in Army Regulation 600-8-22.

   a.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 does not list "Distinguished Soldier" as an authorized award or decoration.  In addition, the evidence of record fails to show that a letter of commendation is an authorized award or decoration.

   b.  Thus, the applicant is not entitled to entry of either "Distinguished Soldier" or "Letter of Commendation, dated 27 December 1976" in item 26 of his
DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant is advised that a copy of the Letter of Commendation, dated 
27 December 1976, will be filed in his Official Military Personnel File as a matter related to this Record of Proceedings.

4.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting the requested relief.

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 that 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)                                         AR20140017697



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140017697



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006426

    Original file (20140006426.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Did the applicant sexually harass any Soldier during the 4 September 2012 and 11 October 2012 incidents in question? The applicant did not sexually harass any Soldier during the 4 September 2012 and 11 October 2012 incidents in question. On 15 November 2012, MG S____ W. S____, Commanding General, 335th Signal Command (Theater) (Provisional), requested delegation of authority to dispose of the applicant's misconduct case wherein he stated an Army Regulation 15-6 investigation of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012220

    Original file (20090012220.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Awards of the Army Commendation Medal may be made for acts of valor performed under circumstances described above which are of lesser degree than required for award of the Bronze Star Medal. The evidence of record shows the FSM was awarded the EAME Campaign Medal. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by adding to his WD AGO Form 53-55 the Army Commendation Medal and adding four bronze service stars to his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006038

    Original file (20120006038.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests: * removal of the last charge on the continuation sheet of the DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)) from his records * addition of the DA Form 2823 (Sworn statement), dated 27 March 2009, from Captain (CPT) M____ A. B____ that proved the above charge was untrue 2. The applicant states: * he received an Article 15 on 27 March 2009 for various infractions * the imposing officer, Major General (MG) W____ B. G____,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012669

    Original file (20090012669.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    A review of the applicant's service record shows no derogatory information in the form of nonjudicial punishment, lost time, or suspension of favorable personnel action that would have disqualified her for the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. Lacking any derogatory information on file that would have disqualified her, it would be appropriate to award the applicant the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal based on completion of qualifying service ending with the termination...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011123

    Original file (20110011123.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) to show his * foreign service at Enewetak Atoll - Marshall Islands from February to July 1978 * award of the Humanitarian Service Medal * exposure to radiation 2. Although there was no provision to enter the specific location of an operation a Soldier supported, or that he was exposed to radiation at the time the applicant served, in the interest of clarity there would be no harm to the Army or the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006786

    Original file (20140006786.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel states an AR 15-6 investigation was conducted about the command climate of the applicant's unit. Headquarters, 8th TSC, Fort Shafter, HI, memorandum, dated 27 April 2011, subject: AR 15-6 Investigation Appointment, shows COL B____ A____ was appointed as an IO by MG M____ J. T____, CG, 8th TSC, to conduct an informal AR 15-6 investigation into the command climate within the 45th SBDE command group, and an assessment of the relationship between the Brigade Commander, her brigade...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010925

    Original file (20090010925.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) to show his highest level of education/training, award of the Army Commendation Medal, and that he was promoted to specialist five (SP5)/pay grade E-5. Therefore, it would be appropriate to correct his DD Form 214 to show this award.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005752C070206

    Original file (20050005752C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that several training courses be added to his DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with the separation dates of 26 May 1976, 26 January 1981, and 31 March 1996. The applicant provides three DD Forms 214, an award certificate for the Meritorious Service Medal, a Certificate of Achievement, a Certificate of Appreciation, and 14 training certificates in support of his application. The Board determined that the evidence presented was...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003088

    Original file (20110003088.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He completed 3 years of active duty service. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the AGCM is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency, and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service. There is no evidence of record showing he ever received any disciplinary action or that his commander ever had any reason to deny him award of the AGCM.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001467

    Original file (20130001467.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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. His DD Form 214 shows in: a. item 13, the: * Meritorious Service Medal * Army Good Conduct Medal (2nd Award) * Senior Parachutist Badge * Army Commendation Medal (2nd...