IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  22 September 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150002046 


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 National Defense Service Medal 
* issuance of a document in a DD Form 214 format in lieu of his "Summary of Discharge" 
* a separation document to cover his U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) service, award of the National Defense Service Medal, and award of military occupational specialty (MOS) 42A (Human Resources Specialist)

2.  The applicant states –

* he was told he would be awarded the National Defense Service Medal but has not received it 
* he completed training and was awarded MOS 42A but it is not on his DD Form 214
* when asked for verification of service a DD Form 214 is what is requested, the Summary of Discharge does not look like the DD Form 214 and he requests it be put into a DD Form 214 format

3.  The applicant provides copies of his 22 March 2001 DD Form 214, a DD Form 215 (Correction to the DD Form 214), two DA Forms 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), and a 22 March 2012 discharge order.


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 Army National Guard (ARNG) in June 1996 and was called to active duty for initial active duty for training on 7 August 1996.  He completed training and was awarded the MOS 13B (Cannon Crewmember).  He was released from active duty on 22 November 1996 and returned to his ARNG unit.  

3.  The record does not contain a National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) for this period of service from his ARNG enlistment until his enlistment in the Regular Army (RA).

4.  The applicant enlisted in the RA on 26 May 1998 in the MOS 13B.  His records show he was awarded the Army Service Medal, Parachutist Badge, Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Hand Grenade Bar, and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar. 

5.  His DD Form 214 shows he was honorably discharged effective 22 March 2001 with 2 years, 2 months, and 12 days of creditable service.  He had two periods of lost time "19980815-1999010; 19991015-19991229," and 427 days of excess leave "20000112-20010322."  His awards are shown as the Army Service Medal, Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Hand Grenade Bar, and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  He was not transferred to the USAR.

6.  A 24 July 2002 DD Form 215 (Correction to the DD Form 214) corrected his creditable service time to 2 years, 4 months, and 28 days, his excess leave to 581 days "19990818-20010322", and deleted the "19991015-19991229" period of lost time.  His award of the Parachutist Badge was also added at that time.

7.  Following a break in service from March 2001 to October 2004, the applicant enlisted in the ARNG on or about 10 October 2004.  There are differing dates on diverse official documents in his record as to his actual date of entry into the ARNG ranging from 10 October to 22 October 2004.

8.  ARNG Orders 250-615, dated 7 September 2006, discharged the applicant from the ARNG in the rank of specialist with an honorable discharge and transferred him to the USAR Control Group (IRR).  

9.  His 5 September 2006 NGB Form 22 shows he was discharged for unsatisfactory participation with a general characterization of service.  His awards are shown as only the Army Service Ribbon.

10.  The 7 September 2006 orders were amended on 12 September 2006 to read "Reserve assignment: USAR Control Group (Reinf)" effective 5 September 2006 with a general discharge due to continued and willful absence.

11.  On 14 November 2006, the applicant was released from the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) and assigned to a USAR Troop Program Unit (TPU) in Beaver, WV.  

12.  On 27 April 2008, the applicant was reassigned to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) due to unresolvable employment conflicts.  

13.  On 30 April 2008, he was again assigned to a USAR TPU in Beaver, WV.  

14.  In 2009, the applicant completed Phase I and Phase II of the Human Resources Specialist Course.

15.  On 26 August 2010, the applicant received TPU to TPU transfer orders.

16.  Headquarters, 99th Regional Support Command Orders 10-238-00064, awarded him MOS 42A2O effective 1 September 2010 in conjunction with his promotion to the rank of sergeant/E-5.

17.  On 22 March 2012, the applicant was discharged from the USAR with an honorable characterization of service.

18.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 27 July 1950 through 27 July 1954, 1 January 1961 through 14 August 1974, 2 August 1990 through 30 November 1995 and 11 September 2001 to a date to be determined.  Service members on active duty, members of the Selected Reserve in good standing, and members of other than the Selected 
Reserve who were called to active duty will be eligible.  Members of the Army National Guard and USAR on short tours of duty to fulfill training obligations under an inactive duty training program are not eligible.

19.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge, release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army.  It establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214 and states the DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty (emphasis added), retirement, or discharge.  

20.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552, the statutory authority for the ABCMR, gives the Board broad authority to correct Army records to remove errors or to remedy an injustice; however, the authority granted by this statute is not unlimited.  The ABCMR may only correct Army records.  The Board has no authority to correct records created by the other Services, the Department of Defense, or other governmental agencies.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  It is not clear if the "Summary of Discharge" the applicant refers to is his NGB Form 22 or if he is referring to a different document that he has not provided.  The available record does not contain any document by that name.

2.  If the applicant is referring to the NGB Form 22, this is a National Guard form created for use by the State National Guard to reflect National Guard service.  While the ABCMR can recommend changes to information on this form, it does not have the authority to correct the form or create a different version of the form.

3.  The applicant's first period of service in the ARNG and his period of Regular Army service do not fall in a period of eligibility for the National Defense Service Medal.  Therefore, he is not authorized this award based on these periods of service.  

4.  He served in the ARNG and in USAR TPUs following his release from active duty.  He was discharged with either an honorable or a general under other than honorable conditions characterization of service for these periods of service.  Based on this service he is authorized the National Defense Service Medal.  However, inclusion of this award on his DD Form 214 would not be appropriate.

5.  The applicant was awarded the Army Service Medal, Parachutist Badge, Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Hand Grenade Bar, and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar while on active duty. However, only his award of the Army Service Ribbon was included on his NGB Form 22.  It recommended that the applicant contact the Office of the West Virginia State National Guard Adjutant General to request correction of the NGB Form 22 to include the omitted awards.

6.  The available records contain no evidence that the National Guard authorized award of the National Defense Service Medal during the applicant's period of service from 22 October 2004 through 5 September 2006.  Again it is recommended that the applicant contact the State Adjutant General's Office to request award of this medal and to have it included on the NGB Form 22.

7.  A DD Form 214 records a service member's active duty service.  The information on the DD Form 214 is related to what occurred as of the date of the separation; it is a snapshot of history as it was at that time.  Inclusion of any action that occurred after the date of separation on this form is not authorized. 

8.  Similarly, the purpose of the NGB Form 22 is to record ARNG service.  Entries of information of events or actions that occurred after the period covered by the form cannot be included on that document.

9.  The applicant has awarded MOS 42A in 2010; however, there is no separation document on which to list this MOS.

10.  Regrettably, there is no separation document similar to the DD Form 214 or the NGB Form 22 to record a summation of his USAR service, schools, promotions, and awards.

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)                                         AR20150002046



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20150002046



6


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1