IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 December 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100014800 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 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show award of the Army of Occupation Medal. 2. The applicant states he served on active duty in Berlin, Germany with the 43rd Chemical Detachment, Combat Support Battalion, Berlin Brigade. 3. The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Achievement, and Certificate of Appreciation. 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. On 3 September 1986, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. He completed his initial training and was awarded military occupational specialty 54B (Chemical Operations Specialist). 3. On 27 February 1987, the applicant was assigned to the 43rd Chemical Detachment, located in Berlin, Germany. 4. The Certificate of Achievement, Combat Support Battalion, Berlin Brigade, dated 20 November 1987, provided by the applicant shows that he was recognized for meritorious achievement during the period 9 to 23 October 1987 while serving as a member of the third squad of the 43rd Chemical Detachment. 5. The Certificate of Appreciation, Berlin Brigade, dated 31 March 1988, provided by the applicant was awarded to him for his dedicated and professional service to the Berlin Brigade. 6. On 2 June 1988, the applicant was released from active duty. He had attained the rank of specialist four, pay grade E-4, and had completed 1 year and 9 months of creditable active duty service. 7. Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 lists his awards as the Army Service Ribbon, Army Commendation Medal, Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar, and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar. 8. The applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record - Part II) shows in Item 9 (Awards, Decorations and Campaigns): Army Service Ribbon and the Army of Occupation Medal. 9. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) authorizes award of the Army of Occupation Medal for the occupation of Berlin between 9 May 1945 and 2 October 1990. 10. Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the Army Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency, and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service. This period is 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military service. Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show award of the Army of Occupation Medal. 2. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant served during a qualifying period for award of the Army of Occupation Medal. Therefore, this award should be shown on his DD Form 214. 3. The applicant’s records clearly show that he distinguished himself in the performance of his military service as evidenced by his receiving an Army Commendation Medal, Certificate of Achievement, and a Certificate of Appreciation. Furthermore, there is no evidence showing that the applicant's commander took any action to deny him award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. Therefore, it is presumed that his not receiving an Army Good Conduct Medal for his service was an oversight. Accordingly, he should be awarded this medal. BOARD VOTE: ____X___ ____X___ ____X___ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 3 September 1986 to 2 June 1988; and b. showing that, in addition to the awards already shown on his DD Form 214, his authorized awards include the Army Good Conduct Medal and the Army of Occupation Medal. _______ _ _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) AR20100014800 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100014800 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1