RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        16 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040011365


      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. John J. Wendland, Jr.         |     |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 award of U.S Army Basic Marksmanship Badges.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he wants his service record
corrected to show he is entitled to award of Marksmanship Badges for
qualifying as Expert with the .45 Caliber Submachine Gun and .38 Caliber
Pistol, and for qualifying as Sharpshooter with the .45 Caliber Pistol.

3.  The applicant provides no documentary evidence in support of his
application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 25 July 1961, the date of his release from active duty.  The
application submitted in this case is dated 1 December 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 limitations 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.  Applicant's DD Form 214 shows that he was inducted into the United
States Army on 6 August 1959 and served overseas in Germany for 1 year, 5
months, and 18 days.  Available records show that he was assigned to
Headquarters, 66th Military Intelligence Group while in Germany.  He was
separated from the U.S. Army under honorable conditions on 25 July 1961 and
transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve.

4.  The applicant's DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report
of Transfer or Discharge), Item 26 (Decorations, Medals, Badges,
Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized)
contains the entry, "None".

5.  The applicant's records contain a DA Form 24 (Service Record) that
shows in Section 9 (Medals, Decorations, and Citations) the entry, "Expert
M-1 Rifle".

6.  The applicant's records also contain an extract of DA Form 20 (Enlisted
Qualification Record) that shows in Item 28 (Qualification In Arms) the
applicant qualified as Expert with the M-1 Rifle on 25 September 1959, and
qualified as Sharpshooter with the .38 Caliber Revolver (Pistol) on 30
September 1960.  In addition, the document shows that the applicant
maintained his qualification with the M-1 Rifle on 15 July 1962.

7.  There is no evidence in the applicant's records that shows he qualified
as Expert with the .45 Caliber Submachine Gun or the .38 Caliber Pistol,
nor that the applicant qualified as Sharpshooter with the .45 Caliber
Pistol.

8.  The applicant states, in effect, that the records of his weapon
qualifications apparently have been lost, or just not recorded on his DD
Form 214.

9.  Review of the applicant's records reveals that he may be entitled to
additional awards which are not shown on his DD Form 214.

10.  There is no evidence the applicant received the first award of the
Good Conduct Medal.  There also is no evidence the applicant was
disqualified by his chain of command from receiving the Good Conduct Medal.
 His records do not contain any adverse information and he received conduct
and efficiency ratings of “excellent and superior” throughout his service.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Good
Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their
exemplary conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of
active duty enlisted service.  After 27 June 1950 to the present time, the
current standard for award of the Good Conduct Medal is 3 years of
qualifying service, but as little as one year is required for the first
award in those cases when the period of service ends with the termination
of Federal military service.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to
the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the
National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for
any period between 27 July 1950 through 27 July 1954, 1 January 1961
through
14 August 1974, and 2 August 1990 through 30 November 1995.





13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, in pertinent part, sets forth requirements
for award of basic marksmanship qualification badges.  The qualification
badge is awarded to indicate the degree in which an individual has
qualified in a prescribed record course, and an appropriate bar is
furnished to denote each weapon with which the individual has qualified.
The qualification badges are in three classes:  Expert, Sharpshooter, and
Marksman.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that he is entitled to award of Marksmanship
Badges for qualifying as Expert with the .45 Caliber Submachine Gun and .38
Caliber Pistol, and for qualifying as Sharpshooter with the .45 Caliber
Pistol.

2.  The applicant provides no documentary evidence in support of his
application. In addition, there is no evidence of records that supports
these contentions.

3.  Evidence of records show that the applicant qualified as Expert with
the M-1 Rifle and qualified as Sharpshooter with the .38 Caliber Revolver
(Pistol).

4.  The applicant's DD Form 214 does not show award of his qualification
badges.  In accordance with Army regulation, he is entitled to award of the
U.S. Army Basic Marksmanship Badge for qualifying as Expert with the M-1
Rifle and the U.S. Army Basic Marksmanship Badge for qualifying as
Sharpshooter with the .38 Caliber Pistol.  Therefore, his records should be
corrected to show award of these qualification badges.

5.  The applicant is entitled to the first award of the Good Conduct Medal
for the period 6 August 1959 through 25 July 1961 based on completion of a
period of qualifying service ending with the termination of a period of
Federal military service.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his
records to show this award.

6.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he served a qualifying period for
award of the National Defense Service Medal.  Therefore, he is entitled to
have his records corrected to show award of the National Defense Service
Medal.

7.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 25 July 1961, the date of his
separation; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for
correction of any error or injustice expired on 24 July 1964.  Although the
applicant did not file within the ABCMR's statute of limitations, it is
appropriate to waive failure to timely file.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

___MHM_  __JTM__   __JBG__  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely
file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army
records of the individual concerned be corrected to show award of the Good
Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period 6 August 1959 to 25 July 1961, the
National Defense Service Medal, the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge
with Rifle Bar, and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with
(.38 Caliber) Pistol Bar.

2.  The Board determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to
warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board
recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to award of
the Expert Marksmanship Badge with (.45 Caliber) Submachine Gun and (.38
Caliber) Pistol Bars, and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge
(.45 Caliber) Pistol Bar.



                            _____Melvin H. Meyer______
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040011365                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050816                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19610725                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-205, Paragraph 7                 |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Early Release Overseas Returnee         |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT PARTIAL                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.0108.0000                           |
|2.                      |107.0109.0000                           |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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