BOARD DATE: 1 February 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100019800 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 Good Conduct Medal (AGCM). 2. The applicant states the AGCM is not listed on his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge). 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214. 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. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 February 1961. He completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty 550.00 (Supply Handler). On 22 December 1963, he was honorably separated from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group for the remainder of his service obligation. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 2 years, 10 months, and 22 days of net service during this period, including 2 years, 3 months, and 1 day of foreign service. The highest rank/pay grade he attained during his period of service was private first class/E-3. 3. His record shows he served in Schwetzingen, Germany, from 22 September 1961 to 22 December 1963 where he was assigned to the 524th Engineer Company. 4. His record includes three instances of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) administered under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). There are two DA Forms 2627-1 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ) and one DA Form 2627 (Summarized Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ) contained within his record which show he accepted NJP for the following offenses: * absenting himself from his prescribed place of duty on 16 June 1963; his punishment was reduction to private/E-2 * absenting himself from his prescribed place of duty on 24 August 1963 (Summarized Article 15) * absenting himself from his prescribed place of duty on 30 November 1963; his punishment was reduction to private/E-2, forfeiture of $33.00, restriction to post for 5 days, and extra duty for 3 days 5. His DA Form 24 (Service Record) shows he received "good" conduct ratings during the periods from 2 October 1961 to 31 August 1963 and from 1 September 1963 to 8 December 1963. 6. His record is void of documentation showing the applicant was awarded the AGCM. 7. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Military Awards), in effect at the time, stated the AGCM was awarded to individuals who completed a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service. This period was 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ended with the termination of a period of Federal military service. The enlisted person must have had all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-martial. However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority announced the award in general orders. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's request to be awarded the AGCM was carefully considered; however, it was not supported by the evidence in this case. 2. The evidence of record shows he did not receive all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings during his service and he accepted NJP on three separate occasions. There is no documentary evidence showing a recommendation for the AGCM was approved by the proper authority or that the AGCM was awarded. Therefore, he is not entitled to award of the AGCM. 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 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) AR20090018975 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100019800 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1