RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           1 February 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040001063


      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.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Walter T. Morrison            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. William D. Powers             |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, award of the Army Good Conduct Medal
(AGCM).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he should be awarded the AGCM
based on his record of service and because he was told he would receive
this award.

3.  The applicant provides his separation document (DD Form 214) and a
correction to his separation document (DD Form 215) in support of his
application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 24 May 1967.  The application submitted in this case is
dated
13 April 2004.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant’s record shows he was inducted into the Army and entered
active duty on 28 April 1965.  He was trained in and awarded military
occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Infantryman).

4.  The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows, in
Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions), that he was promoted to the rank of
corporal (CPL) on 24 October 1966 and that this is the highest rank he
attained while serving on active duty.  Item 33 also shows the he was
reduced to the rank of private first class (PFC) on 25 January 1967 and to
the rank of private/E-2 (PV2) on 17 March 1967.
5.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 shows
that while performing duties as a drill sergeant at Fort Dix, New Jersey,
he received “Unsatisfactory” conduct and efficiency ratings during the
period 3 October 1966 through 12 March 1967, and “Fair” conduct and
efficiency ratings for the period 13 March through 10 May 1967.

6.  Item 44 (Time Lost) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 shows that he was
absent without leave (AWOL) on seven separate occasions, totaling 26 days,
between 10 December 1966 and 16 April 1967.

7.  The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains
documents confirming that he accepted nonjudical punishment (NJP) under the
provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on
the following three separate occasions of the offense(s) indicated:  15
December 1966, for being AWOL from 10 through 12 December 1966; 4 January
1967, for being AWOL from 2 through 4 January 1967; and 11 March 1967, for
being AWOL from 8 through 20 February 1967.

8.  The applicant’s MPRJ also contains a copy of Special Court-Martial
(SPCM) Order Number 80, dated 5 May 1967, issued by Headquarters, 2nd Basic
Combat Training Brigade, United States Army Training Center, Infantry, Fort
Dix, New Jersey.  This order shows that on 25 April 1967, a SPCM found the
applicant guilty of violating Article 86 of the UCMJ, by failing to go to
his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on 18 March 1967.

9.  On 24 May 1967, the applicant was honorably separated at the expiration
of his term of service after completing a total of 2 years of creditable
active military service and having accrued 26 days of time lost due to
AWOL.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time, as amended on 16 March
2004, shows that during his active duty tenure, he earned the following
awards:  Purple Heart, Army Commendation Medal with “V” Device, Vietnam
Service Medal with 2 bronze service stars, Presidential Unit Citation,
Valorous Unit Award, Meritorious Unit Commendation, Republic of Vietnam
Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and Marksman Qualification Badge
with Rifle Bar.

10.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Military Awards) prescribed the Army awards
policy in effect at the time of the applicant’s separation.  Paragraph 44
provided qualifying periods service for award of the AGCM.  The normal
qualifying period identified was each 3 years of service completed on or
after 26 August 1940.  It further stipulated, in pertinent part, that for
the first award only, upon termination of a period of service of less than
3 years on or after 27 June 1950, a period of more than 1 year was a
qualifying period.

11.  Paragraph 45 of the awards regulation contained the criteria for award
of the AGCM.  It stated, in pertinent part, that all conduct and efficiency
ratings during the qualifying period had to be recorded as “Excellent”.  It
further stated that there could be no court-martial conviction during the
qualifying period.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the AGCM and his overall record
of service were carefully considered.  However, these factors provide an
insufficient evidentiary basis to support award of the AGCM.

2.  The awards regulation in effect at the time of the applicant’s
separation stipulated that in order to be eligible to receive the AGCM, a
member must have received all “Excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings
during the qualifying period.  It further specified that there could be no
court-martial conviction during the qualifying period.

3.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant received “Unsatisfactory”
and “Fair” conduct and efficiency ratings during his tenure on active duty
and that he was convicted of being AWOL by a SPCM.  As a result, the
applicant did not satisfy the regulatory criteria necessary to support
award of the AGCM.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 24 May 1967.  Therefore, the time for
him to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on
23 May 1970.  However, he did not file within the 3-year statute of
limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to
show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to
timely file in this case.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___WTM_  ___WDP_  __JTM__  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




            ____Walter T. Morrison ____
                    CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040001063                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/02/01                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1967/05/24                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  46   |107.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]