RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           28 September 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004101893


      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. Fred Eichorn                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher             |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Ronald E. Blakely             |     |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, that all medals and citations to
which he is entitled be added to his separation document (DD Form 214).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his service entitles him to the
National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) and two awards of the Army Good
Conduct Medal (AGCM).  He also claims that during his active duty tenure,
he earned qualification badges for the carbine, M-1 and M-14 rifles, and he
would like these awards added to his DD Form 214 at this time.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his separation document in support of
his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 29 June 1962.  The application submitted in this case is
dated
3 December 2003.

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 confirms he was inducted into the Army and
entered active duty on 28 June 1960.  He was trained in and awarded
military occupational specialty 911.1668 (Medical Specialist) and he was
assigned overseas to Germany, where he arrived for duty on 29 November
1960.

4.  The applicant’s Service Record (DA Form 24) confirms he received
“Excellent conduct and efficiency ratings at all of his assignments.  There
is a Disposition Form (DD Form 96) on file, dated 13 June 1962, which was
prepared by the applicant’ s unit personnel officer.  This document was
addressed to the applicant’s unit commander and indicated that the
applicant’s record verified his eligibility for the AGCM.
5.  Section 9 (Medals, Decorations, and Citations) of the applicant’s DA
Form 24 shows he received the Expert Qualification Badge with Carbine and
Machine Gun Bars and Sharpshooter Qualification Badge with Rifle Bars for
the M-1 and M-14 rifles.

6.  On 29 June 1962, the applicant was honorably released from active duty
at the expiration of his term of service.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at
this time confirms he completed a total of 2 years and 2 days of active
military service.  Item 26 contains the entry “NA”, indicating he earned no
awards during his active duty tenure.

7.  Two DA Forms 1577 (Authorization for Issuance of Awards) on file, dated

30 August 1991 and 6 May 2002, confirm the responsible Department of the
Army agency authorized the issue of the following awards to the applicant
based on a review of his record:  Expert Qualification Badge with Machine
Gun and Carbine Bars; Sharpshooter Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar; and
NDSM.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and
criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-10 contains
guidance on award of the NDSM.  It states, in pertinent part, that it is
authorized for any period of active duty service performed between 1
January 1961 and 14 August 1974.

9.  Chapter 4 of the awards regulation prescribes the policy for award of
the
AGCM.  It states, in pertinent part, that the AGCM is awarded to
individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and
fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  The
normal qualifying period is each
3 years completed on or after 27 August 1940.  However, for the first award
only, a period of less than 3 years but more than 1 year is qualifying
period upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950.

10.  Paragraph 8-44 of the awards regulation contains guidance on award of
Army basic marksmanship qualification badges.  It states that a basic
marksmanship qualification badge is awarded to indicate the degree in which
an individual, military or civilian, has qualified in a prescribed record
course and an appropriate bar is furnished to denote each weapon with which
he or she qualified.  Each bar will be attached to the basic badge which
indicates the qualification last attained with the respective weapon.
Basic qualification badges are of three classes, expert, sharpshooter, and
marksman.

11.  Table 8-2 of the awards regulation contains a list of the only weapons
for which component bars are authorized with the basic marksmanship
qualification badge.  This list includes the machine gun, carbine and
rifle.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant earned the Expert
Qualification Badge with Machine Gun and Carbine Bars and the Sharpshooter
Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-1 & M-14) while he was serving on
active duty.  Thus, it would be appropriate to add these awards to his
separation document at this time.

2.  By regulation, the NDSM is authorized for active duty service performed
between 1 January 1961 and 14 August 1974.  Thus, it would be appropriate
to add this award to the applicant’s record based on his active duty
service during this period.

3.  Section 4 of the applicant’s DA Form 24 confirms he received
"Excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings at each of his active duty
assignments.  Further, the record contains a disposition form in which his
unit personnel officer verified his record showed he was eligible to
receive the AGCM in conjunction with his REFAD.

4.  The applicant’s military record is also void of derogatory information
or a documented record of a disqualification from any of the applicant's
active duty commanders that would have precluded him from receiving the
AGCM.  As a result, it would also be appropriate for him to receive the
first award of the AGCM, for his qualifying honorable active duty service
between 28 June 1960 and 29 June 1962.

5.  However, the record provides no indication that the applicant served a
subsequent three year period of active duty service that would have
authorized him a second award of the AGCM.  Therefore, there is an
insufficient evidentiary basis to support award of a second AGCM.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT RELIEF

__FE____  __KYF__  _REB ___  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 by:

      a.  awarding him the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, for
his qualifying active duty service from 28 June 1960 through 29 June 1962;


      b.  showing he is entitled to the National Defense Medal, for his
qualifying active duty service;


      c.  showing he earned the Expert Qualification Badge with Carbine and
Machine Gun Bars and Sharpshooter Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar
(M-1 & M-14); and

      d.  providing him a corrected separation document that includes these
awards.

2.  The Board further 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
a second award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.




            ____FRED EICHORN_____
                    CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004101893                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2004/09/                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1962/06/29                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT PARTIAL                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  46   |107.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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