RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          20 September 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040011421


      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. Richard P. Nelson             |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James C. Hise                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Thomas E. O'Shaughnessy       |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Patrick H. McGann Jr.         |     |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 correction of his military records to show the
seventh award of the Good Conduct Medal and the Meritorious Service Medal.

2.  The applicant states that the above-mentioned awards were not included
on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
upon his retirement from the Army.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a Certificate of Award of the
Meritorious Service Medal, dated 14 May 1985, in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error that
occurred on 31 May 1985.  The application submitted in this case is dated
8 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 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 records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 25
May 1964.  He remained on active duty, through a series of reenlistments,
until 31 May 1985 when he was honorably separated in pay grade E-7 and
placed on the retired list the following day.  He had served a total of 21
years and 6 days of active military service.

4.  Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons
Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows he is entitled
to the following awards: the Good Conduct Medal (6th Award); the Army
Commendation Medal; the National Defense Service Medal; the Vietnam
Campaign Medal; the Vietnam Service Medal with 5 bronze service stars; the
Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal; two overseas service bars; the Army
Service Ribbon; the Overseas Service Ribbon with Numeral 2; the
Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon with Numeral 1;
and, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm.  No
other awards or decorations are listed.

5.  The applicant’s records show that he was assigned to Battery B, 1st
Battalion, 1st Air Defense Artillery, 10th Air Defense Artillery Brigade,
32d Army Air Defense Command, United States Army Europe on 24 April 1982
and that he remained in the unit until his departure from Germany in April
of 1985.  According to the certificate provided by the applicant in support
of his request, he was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for
outstanding meritorious service during the period June 1982 to April 1985.
The certificate was signed on 14 May 1985 by Major General Victor J. Hugo,
Jr., commanding general of the 32d Army Air Defense Command, and reflects
the signature of John O. Marsh, Jr., Secretary of the Army.  However,
copies of orders announcing the award were not in records available to the
Board.

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Good
Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their
conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty
enlisted service.  This period is 3 years except in those cases when the
period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of Federal
military service.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good
Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There are no orders in the applicant’s available records awarding him
the Meritorious Service Medal.  However, his award certificate is signed by
the appropriate commander and Secretary of the Army, and the date of the
award coincides with his dates of service in Germany.  In the absence of
orders, or evidence to the contrary, there is sufficient evidence to accept
the applicant’s award certificate as authentication of entitlement to the
Meritorious Service Medal, and in the interest of justice it would be
appropriate to add the award to his separation document at this time.

2.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant received six awards of
the Good Conduct Medal.  Since there is no record of indiscipline in the
applicant’s entire record of service, it is reasonable to presume that the
six awards cover an 18-year period, from 25 May 1964 to 24 May 1982, with
each award covering a period of 3 years.

3.  The evidence also shows that the applicant served a total of 21 years
of Federal military service.  Given that he was awarded the Meritorious
Service Medal for outstanding service during his last 3 years of active
service, it is clearly evident that he also should have received the
seventh award of the Good Conduct Medal and that an injustice occurred.
Accordingly, in the interest of justice it would be appropriate to add the
seventh award of the Good Conduct Medal, covering the period 25 May 1982 to
24 May 1985, to his separation document at this time.


BOARD VOTE:

__jch____  ___teo___  ___phm_  GRANT RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
a recommendation for 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 by showing award of:

      a. the Meritorious Service Medal; and,


      b. the Seventh Award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 25 May
1982 to 24 May 1985.




            ___________James C. Hise__________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040011421                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050920                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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