RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          25 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040011440


      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. Wanda L. Waller               |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Margaret Patterson            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Ronald Blakely                |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Linda Barker                  |     |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 the Good Conduct Medal.

2.  The applicant states that the medal was omitted from his DD Form 214
(Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States).

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

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

The American Legion, as counsel for the applicant, was notified of the
applicant's pending review by the Board; however, no brief was submitted.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on
8 March 1954.  The application submitted in this case is dated 19 November
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 not available to the Board for
review.  A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members’ records
at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  It is believed that the
applicant’s records were lost or destroyed in that fire.  However, there
were sufficient documents remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board
to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.

4.  The applicant was inducted on 21 October 1952.  He was selected for and
attended the Engineer Officers Candidate School from 21 September 1953 to
8 March 1954.  On 8 March 1954, the applicant was honorably discharged to
accept a commission as a second lieutenant after completing 1 year, 4
months, and 16 days of creditable active service with no time lost.



5.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 does not show the Good Conduct Medal as an
authorized award.

6.  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.

7.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided policy and
criteria concerning individual military decorations.  It stated that the
Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted
active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940 and,
for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June
1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was selected for attendance at the Engineer Officers
Candidate School with less than one year of service and it appears he had
no record of courts-martial or disciplinary actions or he would not have
been selected.  He was honorably discharged after successfully completing 1
year, 4 months, and 16 days of creditable active service with no time lost.
 Therefore, it appears he met the eligibility criteria for the first award
of the Good Conduct Medal based on term of service for the period 21
October 1952 through 8 March 1954.

2.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error now
under consideration on 8 March 1954; therefore, the time for the applicant
to file a request for correction of any error expired on 7 March 1957.  The
applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations; however,
based on the available evidence it would be in the interest of justice to
excuse failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

MP_____  RB_____  LB______  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:

      a.  awarding him the first award of the Good Conduct Medal for the
period 21 October 1952 through 8 March 1954; and


      b.  amending his DD Form 214 to add award of the Good Conduct Medal.




            __Margaret Patterson_____
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040011440                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050825                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.0056                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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