APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That he be awarded an Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) for the period of service from 8 December 1953 to 4 March 1955.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the period of service referred to above was honorable and he should, therefore, be issued an amended DD Form 214, showing the award of the AGCM.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 23 October 1950 and was discharged under honorable conditions on       19 November 1953.  He enlisted in the USAR on 3 December 1953 for a period of 3 years and was ordered to active on 8 December 1953.  He was honorably discharged on 4 March 1955. He again enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 March 1955 for 6 years and was dishonorably discharged on 3 February 1956 as the result of a sentence of a general court-martial.

The record shows that of the applicant’s three periods of active service only that enlistment period between 8 December 1953 and 4 March 1955 (1 year, 2 months and 27 days) resulted in an honorable discharge.  However, the record also shows that during this period, he was convicted by a special court-martial which probably accounts for the reason why there is no documentation in the file to indicate that he was recommended for the AGCM.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the AGCM is awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency and fidelity for a specific period of service, normally 3 years.  The enlisted person must be recommended for the award and it must be announced in general orders.  Additional criteria, then in effect, provided that, throughout the qualifying period, the enlisted person must have received all excellent conduct and efficiency ratings and have no court-martial convictions.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant’s conduct during the period in question, as evidenced by a special court-martial conviction, does not appear to have met the standards expected of a soldier for award of the AGCM.

2.  In view of the foregoing, there appears to be no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT          

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




		David R. Kinneer
		Executive Secretary