IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 March 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150008842 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____X___ ____X___ ____X___ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 March 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150008842 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined 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. Enclosure 1 IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 March 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150008842 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 Army Sea Duty Ribbon based on his service in Army watercraft units from 1991 to 1994. 2. The applicant states, in effect: a. The Army has previously denied his applications for this award twice. The Army created the Army Sea Duty Ribbon in 2006 and he submitted an application for award of the ribbon in June 2007. The request was denied based upon the assessment that he was a passenger on board and did not have the required sea duty time. b. In 2011, the Army modified the requirement for sea duty for Reserve Component (RC) Soldiers. Sea duty was not tracked prior to the creation of the Army Sea Duty Ribbon; therefore, the requirement for sea duty was waived for RC Soldiers prior to Fiscal Year 2006 (FY06). He made a second application in March 2012 based on the revised criteria and again his application was denied for the same reasons. The Army has not changed the RC requirements for sea duty since 2011. Army transportation maritime guidance for U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) service members removed the sea duty requirement. c. Further, as a company commander, he supervised unit operations and crew performance on those occasions when he sailed aboard his vessels, which he often did. These command duties logically would fall under the category of those performed by personnel who would not be otherwise designated as crew. AR 600-88 (Sea Duty) addresses this contingency. Thus, even though there is no requirement for sea duty prior to FY06, on every occasion when he sailed on the vessels in his company he was performing legitimate duties and he was not a passenger. His rationale is detailed in the attached applications. d. Between 1985 and 2005, he served in four components of the Army, Regular Army, Army National Guard (ARNG), USAR, and the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR). From 1985 to 2004, he served as a commissioned officer. He resigned his commission and enlisted in the Washington ARNG (WAARNG) where he served as a sergeant. He served on active duty from 1985 to 1989 and from 2004 to 2005. He served in the ARNG from 1991 to 1997 and from 2004 to 2005. The remainder of his service was in the USAR or IRR. 3. The applicant provides a/an: * two DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * two National Guard Bureau Forms 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) * self-authored letter, dated 8 June 2007 * letter, dated 3 August 2007 * memorandum, dated 15 March 2011 * self-authored letter, dated 22 March 2012, with three DA Forms 67-8 (Officer Evaluation Report (OER)) for the rating periods 1 August 1991 through 30 June 1994 as attachments * six pages of email, dated between 23 March and 14 May 2012 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. Having had prior active service, the applicant was commissioned as a first lieutenant Reserve officer in the Transportation Corps, WAARNG on 4 January 1991 and he served in designated specialty/area of concentration 88C (Marine and Terminal Operations). He was promoted to the rank of captain (CPT) on 8 October 1991. 3. His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows he was assigned as follows: * Platoon Leader, 506th Transportation Company, Tacoma, WA, from 4 January to 31 July 1991 * Marine Maintenance Officer, 506th Transportation Company, from 1 August 1991 to 30 June 1992 * Company Commander, 1118th Transportation Company, Tacoma, from 1 July 1992 to 8 July 1994 4. He attended and successfully completed the Transportation Officer Advanced Course (TOAC) Phase I from 18 to 29 May 1992, at the 1151st USAR Force (USARF) School, Tonawanda, NY. 5. In July 1992, he received an OER covering the period 1 August 1991 through 30 June 1992 for his duties as Marine Maintenance Officer, 506th Transportation Company. The OER stated during this rating period he had, in part: * completed TOAC within 1 year while continuing full-time graduate schooling * served as officer in charge (OIC) for the Civil Disturbance Team,144th Trans Battalion * during annual training (AT) 1992, served as OIC for the 506th Support Element including marine maintenance contact team, watercraft support, and wheeled maintenance 6. He attended and successfully completed TOAC Phase II from 27 July to August 1992, at the 2090th USARF School, Harrisburg, PA. 7. In July 1993, he received an OER covering the period 1 July 1992 through 30 June 1993 for his duties as Company Commander, 1118th Transportation Company. The OER stated during this rating period he had, in part: * during AT 1993, insured all licensing requirements were completed for all Soldiers * during AT 1993, the Company had 10 LCMs participating in the Logistics-Over-The Shore operation without any significant breakdowns 8. In September 1994, he received an OER covering the period 1 July 1993 through 30 June 1994 for his duties as Company Commander, 1118th Transportation Company. The OER stated during this rating period he had, in part: * completed his Master of Science Degree in Engineering and the Combined Arms and Service Staff School (CAS3) * planned and directed an LCM-8 open ocean deployment and directed 4 days of complex training that resulted in the best AT period 9. On 8 June 2007, he submitted a request to the Chief, Marine Qualification Division (MQR), Fort Eustis, VA, for award of the Army Sea Duty Ribbon. He stated, in part, from August 1991 to June 1994 he was assigned as Marine Maintenance Officer and Company Commander, WAARNG, and participated in three AT exercises during this period. He also stated he was attaching three OERs [as discussed above] that confirmed the AT participation. 10. On 3 August 2007, his request was denied and the Chief, MQR stated his records reflected his service in a unit that had qualifying watercraft; however, they had no proof of his vessel assignment as a crew member aboard. Soldiers who are passengers onboard do not meet the definition of sea service. Time will accumulate only for actual days which a Soldier is assigned and performing duty aboard qualifying vessels. 11. He provides a memorandum, dated 15 March 2011, subject: Guidance for the Processing of the Army Sea Duty Ribbon for USAR Component Soldiers, issued by the Chief, MQR. It stated, in part, that prior to approval of the Army Sea Duty Service Ribbon, there were no requirements for Soldiers to track underway time. For that reason, the 25-day underway requirement was waived for years prior to FY06. 12. On 22 March 2012, he submitted a second request to the Chief, MQR, for award of the Army Sea Duty Ribbon. In an email, dated 14 May 2012, he was told that his request was denied and stated, in part, he had been a commander with no watercraft military occupational specialty or duty for watercraft. Since he did not meet the basic eligibility requirements and was essentially only a passenger, it did not meet the definition of sea duty. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), dated 25 June 2015, states: a. On 17 April 2006, the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) approved the establishment of the Army Sea Duty Ribbon. It is awarded to members of the Active Army, ARNG, and USAR for completion of designated periods of sea duty aboard Class A and Class B United States Army Vessels (USAV) as defined in Army Regulation 56–9 (Watercraft),table 1-1 (emphasis added). The Army Sea Duty Ribbon is also authorized to be awarded for duty aboard other qualifying vessels when the vessels meet the requirements of Army Regulation 600-88, paragraph 1–7. b. Active duty members must complete 2 years of cumulative sea duty on a Class A or B USAV or for duty aboard other qualifying vessels when such vessels meet the requirements of AR 600-88, to be awarded the Army Sea Duty Ribbon. Subsequent awards are authorized upon completion of additional 2 years of cumulative sea duty as outlined above. c. Members of the ARNG and USAR must have 2 creditable years in a US Army watercraft unit, which must include a minimum of 25 days underway during each year and two AT exercises underway on a Class A or B USAV or a 90-day deployment aboard a USAV, underway (emphasis added). Subsequent awards are authorized upon completion of additional qualifying periods of sea duty as outlined above. One year of sea duty as a mobilized Soldier will be credited toward 1 creditable year as long as the minimum underway requirement is met. d. The Chief, MQR, Fort Eustis, is the approval authority for award of the Army Sea Duty Ribbon to eligible Service members. The ribbon may be awarded retroactively to those personnel who were credited with service as defined above after 1 August 1952, the activation date of the first heavy boat company in the Transportation Corps. DISCUSSION: 1. The criteria for the Army Sea Duty Ribbon requires a member or members of the Reserve to have 2 creditable years of sea duty aboard certain vessels and must include a minimum of 25 days underway during each year and two AT exercises. 2. While the applicant may have been performing legitimate duties aboard qualifying vessels during two AT periods, his performance was as a commander providing oversight and does not mean he served as a crew member on the vessel. The evidence of record does not show and he has not provided sufficient evidence that shows he served 2 creditable years of qualifying sea duty. As such, he does not meet the criteria for the Army Sea Duty Ribbon. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings @#!CASENUMBER Enclosure 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150008842 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2