| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Shirley L. Powell | Member | |
| Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr. | Member |
2. The applicant requests that he be awarded the Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL).
3. The applicant states, in effect, that he served honorably while in the service and the only trouble he got into was when he was arrested in Fairbanks, Alaska, 3 weeks before his 21st birthday for being a minor on the premises of a bar. He also states that he attempted to join the National Guard but was rejected because of a problem with his hearing that was probably the result of his being a mortar crewman. In support of his application he submits two photographs showing that he was wearing the GCMDL and letters from five former soldiers he served with and for in Alaska, all of which support his receiving the GCMDL.
4. The applicant’s military records show that he was born on 15 November 1947 and was inducted on 24 January 1968. He completed his training and was transferred to Alaska on 1 July 1968, for duty as an indirect fire crewmember. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 26 September 1968.
5. Although there are no specifics contained in his records that explain exactly what occurred, he was reduced to the pay grade of E-2 on 11 October 1968 (approximately 1 month before his 21st birthday), due to conviction by a civil court. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 25 January 1969 and to the pay grade of E-4 on 25 February 1969.
6. A review of his records shows no other derogatory information and they also show that he had excellent conduct and efficiency ratings. There is also no indication that the commander disqualified the applicant for award of the GCMDL.
7. On 20 January 1970, he was honorably released from active duty as an overseas returnee. He had served 1 year, 11 months and 27 days of total active service.
8. Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, also established the criteria for award of the GCMDL. It states, in pertinent part, that the GCMDL was established by Executive Order 8809, 28 June 1941 and was amended by Executive Order 9323, 1943 and by Executive Order 10444, 10 April 1953 and is awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active Federal military service. The regulation also states, in pertinent part, that for first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950, a period of service of less than 3 years but more than 1 year qualifies for award of the GCMDL. The regulation outlines the criteria for award of the GCMDL and provides, in pertinent part, that the GCMDL is awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active Federal military service. It is awarded on a selective basis to each soldier who distinguishes him or herself from among their fellow soldiers by their exemplary conduct, efficiency, and fidelity throughout their service. There is no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander has approved the award and the award has been announced in permanent orders. Separation transfer points will review records of enlisted personnel being separated to determine whether they qualify for award of the GCMDL. Where possible, a reasonable effort will be made to contact the unit commander prior to awarding the medal to qualified members. The regulation also requires that commanders notify individuals in writing of reasons they will be disqualified for award of the GCMDL and will be afforded to the opportunity to submit matters in their own behalf before they are disqualified for such an award.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The Board notes that the only derogatory information contained in his records was his reduction to the pay grade of E-2 based on his conviction by a civil court. Inasmuch as he was advanced two pay grades (after his reduction), within 4 months of being reduced, it is reasonable to presume that his reduction was for a minor offense.
2. The Board also finds it reasonable to presume that given the absence of a disqualification for award of the GCMDL and the fact that he had excellent conduct and efficiency ratings, in all likelihood the failure to award him the GCMDL was the result of an administrative error. Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice to award him the GCMDL for the period of 24 January 1968 to 20 January 1970.
3. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION: That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the individual concerned the GCMDL for the period of 24 January 1968 to 20 January 1970.
BOARD VOTE:
___fe ___ ___slp___ ___eja__ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
_____Fred Eichorn_______
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2002072581 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/10/22 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 102 | 107.0056/GCMDL |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084961C070212
The applicant states, in effect, that he was wounded in Vietnam and was not awarded the Purple Heart. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant was wounded in Vietnam on 19 February 1969, while serving in the pay grade of E-4, and that he was hospitalized as a result of that wound. RECOMMENDATION : That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the individual concerned the Purple Heart for wounds received on 19 February 1969,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001563C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 OCTOBER 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050001563 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. He departed Vietnam on 19 August 1969 and was transferred to Fort Campbell, where he remained until 17 November 1969, when he was transferred to Fort Hood, Texas. His records also show that he received Excellent...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001563C070206
The applicant states that he was wounded on 13 March 1969 and was awarded the Purple Heart for that wound. He departed Vietnam on 19 August 1969 and was transferred to Fort Campbell, where he remained until 17 November 1969, when he was transferred to Fort Hood, Texas. His records also show that he received “Excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service and there is no derogatory information contained in those records that would serve to disqualify him for award of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050010414C070206
The evidence of record clearly confirms the applicant’s contention that he was awarded the Purple Heart for wounds received in action in Vietnam on 16 May 1968. This conclusion is based on the fact that the record is void of any derogatory information, which would preclude the applicant from being awarded the GCMDL, and the lack of any specific action by the applicant’s unit commander to disqualify him from receiving the award. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004633C070206
Scott W. Faught | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The regulation also states, in pertinent part, that for first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950, a period of service of less than 3 years but more than 1 year qualifies for award of the GCMDL. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071964C070403
The Board considered the following evidence: He had served 2 years of total active service and his report of separation (DD Form 214) shows that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with four bronze service stars, and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal. The Board finds that there is insufficient evidence in the available records to show that the applicant was wounded or injured in Vietnam during an action by enemy forces or that he was treated...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002105C070206
Therefore, absent more conclusive and specific evidence to show that he was wounded as a result of enemy action and that the treatment was made a matter of record, there appears to be no basis to award him the Purple Heart at this time. The applicant has also failed to show through evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record that he ever held the MOS of an infantryman or that he was ever assigned to an infantry unit that engaged the enemy in combat in that capacity. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081269C070215
He had served 2 years of total active service and his DD Form 214, issued at the time of his REFRAD, indicates that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) with three bronze service stars, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal and the Combat Infantryman Badge. Although the Board did not have the benefit of reviewing all of the applicant's medical records, the applicant's separation physical clearly shows that the applicant was wounded and treated...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001205C070205
Peguine M. Taylor | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Although there are no orders in his records to show the award of the Purple Heart, there is evidence in the records that verifies that he was wounded on 31 May 1969. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing that he was awarded the Purple Heart and by awarding him the GCMDL...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040009556C070208
However, the applicant was a qualified infantryman serving in an infantry unit and as such was awarded the CIB. Based on the available evidence, the applicant was awarded the badge that was most appropriate to his qualifications at the time and there is no basis to grant him an additional award of the CMB that was clearly not authorized. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the GCMDL for the...