RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 March 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060012326 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Mr. Gerard W. Schwartz Acting Director Mrs. Victoria A. Donaldson Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Ms. Linda D. Simmons Chairperson Mr. John T. Meixell Member Mr. Ronald S. Venable Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests the appropriate campaign badge that she is entitled to based on her service during the Gulf War Era. 2. The applicant states that she was not aware that she was entitled to a campaign badge until it was brought to her attention by another Soldier. 3. The applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty) in support of this application. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 11 February 1991, the date her discharge. The application submitted in this case is dated 25 August 2006. 2. 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 allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file. 3. Records show the applicant enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 16 April 1982 and entered active duty on 27 February 1986. Records also show the applicant served in Germany during the period 26 May 1986 to 11 February 1991. She was honorably discharged in the rank of specialist/pay grade E-4 by reason of pregnancy on 11 February 1991. 4. Block 12f (Foreign Service) of the applicant's DD Form 214 shows the entry "4 years, 8 months, and 15 days." 5. Block 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 shows that she was awarded the Army Service Ribbon, Army Achievement Medal, NCO Professional Development Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon, Good Conduct Medal, and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16). 6. There are no orders in the available records which show that the applicant was awarded a campaign badge for her military service during the Gulf War Era. 7. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides for announcement of awards. Specifically, this regulations states in paragraph 1-26 that permanent awards of badges, except basic marksmanship qualification badges, identification badges, and the Physical Fitness Badge will be announced in permanent orders by commanders authorized to make the award or permanent orders of Headquarters, Department of the Army. . 8. Review of the applicant's records indicates entitlement to additional awards and decorations that are not shown on her DD Form 214. 9. Army Regulation 600-8-22 as amended 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. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contention that she is entitled to a campaign badge based on her service during the Gulf War Era was carefully considered and determined to be without merit. There is insufficient evidence in the available records to show that she is entitled to a campaign badge based on her military service. 2. Records show that the applicant served a qualifying period of service for award of the National Defense Service Medal. Therefore, she is entitled to correction of her records to show this award. 3. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 11 February 1991; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 10 February 1994.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case. 4. Evidence shows that the applicant’s records contain administrative error which does not require action by the Board. Therefore, administrative correction of the applicant’s records will be accomplished by the Case Management Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as outlined by the Board in paragraph 2 of the Board Determination/Recommendation section below. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __JTM__ __LDS___ __RSV__ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. 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 award of a campaign badge to individual concerned. 2. The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the individual should be corrected. Therefore, the Board requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual concerned to show award of the National Defense Service Medal. _Linda D. Simmons_____ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED YYYYMMDD TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) DATE OF DISCHARGE YYYYMMDD DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR . . . . . DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.