IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 September 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100011509 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 that his records be corrected to show award of the Expert Infantryman Badge (EIB) and the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). 2. The applicant states he was awarded the EIB and CIB in 1991. He goes on to state that he served in Operation Desert Storm while his unit was in Germany and some of his unit was sent to a war zone. He also states that his unit knew the medals were sent to him by the Department of the Army after they returned and he forwarded them to his father in Colorado. 3. The applicant provides no documents with his application. 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 17 January 1991, the applicant was ordered to active duty from the U.S. Army Reserve in support of Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm. He was released from active duty on 18 May 1991. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for this period does not show he served in Southwest Asia. It does not show he was awarded the EIB or the CIB. 3. On 1 February 2007, while serving in the pay grade of E-6 in the South Dakota Army National Guard (SDARNG), he was honorably discharged and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Retired). 4. His Report of Separation and Record of Service (NGB Form 22) shows he held the primary specialty numbers of: * (primary) – 21H3O Construction Engineer Supervisor * (secondary) – 13B3O Cannon Crewmember * (additional) – 11B3O Infantryman 5. His decorations do not include awards of the EIB and the CIB. Areview of his official military personnel file (OMPF) failed to reveal orders for award of the EIB or CIB. Additionally, there is no indication that the applicant served in combat while assigned to an infantry unit or that he successfully completed the EIB proficiency test. 6. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states there are basically three requirements for award of the CIB. The Soldier must be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, he must be assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and he must actively participate in such ground combat. Award of the CIB is announced in orders. 7. Army Regulation 600-8-22 states award of the EIB requires that an individual must have satisfactorily completed the prescribed proficiency tests while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of at least battalion size. To be eligible for testing and award of the EIB, a Soldier must be in an active Army status and must have an infantry or Special Forces specialty. Award of the EIB is announced in orders. 8. The Defense Manpower Data Center compiled the Desert Shield/Storm Data Base. The primary Desert Shield/Storm file contains one record for each active duty member who participated in-theater between 2 August 1990 and 31 July 1991 and one record for each Reserve/National Guard member or retiree who was activated or federalized in response to Desert Shield/Desert Storm. 9. The applicant's name is not listed on the Desert Shield/Storm Data Base. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s contention that he was awarded the EIB and the CIB has been noted and appears to lack merit. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application and the evidence of record that he was in fact awarded the EIB and the CIB. 2. The applicant has not submitted and his records do not contain orders awarding him the EIB or the CIB. There is no evidence to show he served in a combat zone, and he does not appear to contend that he did serve in a combat zone. Therefore, in the absence of orders there appears to be no basis to add these awards to his record at this time. 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) AR20100011509 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100011509 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1