RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          16 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040008747


      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             |
|     |Ms. Rosa M. Chandler              |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Melvin H. Meyer               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. James B. Gunlicks             |     |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 that his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from
the Armed Forces of the United States) be corrected to show award of the
Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL) and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification
Badge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was awarded the Sharpshooter
Marksmanship Qualification Badge at Camp McCoy, Wisconsin after completion
of basic training and he was awarded the GCMDL when he left Japan to return
to the United States.  He also states that he does not understand why it
has been so hard for him to obtain the awards that he is authorized.  He
served in the military more than 50 years ago and has been trying to get
his awards since that time.  He is now 76 years of age.

3.  The applicant provides in support of his request a copy of his DD Form
214.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 17 October 1952.  The application submitted in this case is
date stamped
18 October 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 military records are presumed lost or destroyed in the
National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973.  Information herein was
obtained from a partially reconstructed record which contains a copy of his
DD Form 214 and Honorable Discharge Certificate.

4.  The available record does not address the applicant's conduct or
efficiency [needed to determine eligibility for the GCMDL], nor does it
address his marksmanship skills during the period that he served.

5.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that he was inducted into the Army of
the United States on 26 October 1950 and he entered into an active duty
status on that same date.  He served in the Field Artillery Corps.
6.  On 17 October 1952, the applicant was honorably released from active
duty and transferred to the United States Army Reserve.  He completed 1
year, 11 months and 22 days of active military service of which 1 year, 1
month and
9 days were Foreign Service.  His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded the Army
of Occupation Medal (Japan).  The GCMDL and Sharpshooter Marksmanship
Qualification Badge are not shown as authorized awards.

7.  Army Regulation 600-65 (later superseded by Army regulation 672-5-1),
in effect at the time, provided policy and criteria concerning service
medals.  It stated that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded to enlisted
Soldiers who, on or after 27 August 1940, completed 3 years of continuous
active Federal military service; or who, for the first award only,
completed 1 year of service during the period 7 December 1941 to 2 March
1946  while the United States was at war; or who, for the first award only,
completed less than 3 years, but more than 1 year of active Federal
military service on or after 27 June 1950.  At the time, a Soldier's
conduct and efficiency ratings must have been rated as "excellent" for the
entire period of qualifying service and there must have been no convictions
by courts-martial.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), in pertinent part, sets
forth requirements for award of basic marksmanship qualification badge.
The qualification badge is awarded to indicate the degree in which a
Soldier has qualified in a prescribed record course, and an appropriate bar
is furnished to denote each weapon with which the Soldier has qualified.
The qualification badges are in three classes:  Expert, Sharpshooter, and
Marksman.  Soldiers will wear the basic badge which indicates the
qualification last attained with the respective weapon.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In order to correct the applicant's record to show award of the GCMDL,
there must be affirmative evidence that he received the award [i.e.,
orders] or that the conduct and efficiency ratings he received from his
commanding officers were "excellent."  This information is not available;
therefore, no determination can be made as to entitlement to the GCMDL.

2.  In order to correct the applicant's record to show award of the
Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge, there must be affirmative
evidence that he received the award [i.e., orders] or that he achieved the
required number of points in a prescribed weapons record course.  This
information is not available; therefore, no determination can be made as to
entitlement to the Sharpshooter Badge.

3.  The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of
administrative regularity, that is, what the Army did in a particular
instance was correct.  The applicant has the requirement of proving an
error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.  In the absence of a
service record, the applicant has not met this requirement.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 17 October 1952, therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on
16 October 1955.  However, the applicant 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

__mhm___  __jtm___  __jbg___  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.



                                  Melvin H. Meyer
            ______________________
                    CHAIRPERSON


                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040008747                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050816                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY)                                  |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.0056                                |
|2.                      |107.0109                                |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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