RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           4 January 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004106344


      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             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Karen A. Heinz                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Robert Duecaster              |     |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 reconsideration of his request for award of the
National Defense Service Medal (NDSM).

2.  The applicant states that he appreciates being awarded the Army Good
Conduct Medal and the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal but was disappointed
he did not receive the NDSM for his service commencing on 11 February 1962.
 He had sent a letter, dated 5 January 1962, as proof.

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were
summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number
AR2003089059 on 22 January 2004.

2.  The 5 January 1962 letter, which was not addressed in the applicant's
original case, will be considered by the Board.

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 into the Army on 3 January 1958 and released
from active duty on 17 December 1959.

5.  Headquarters, U. S. Army Staff Group, Washington, D.C. sent a letter to
the applicant's employer, Great A & P Tea Company, on 5 January 1962.  In
that letter, that Headquarters informed his employer that the Staff was
responsible for coordinating high priority classified activities of various
units.  From time to time they required the temporary services of
individuals who not only possessed the necessary language ability and
military or civilian background but who also met certain criteria to permit
their participation in classified activities.  The applicant
had tentatively given his consent to engage in that activity provided his
status with his employer was not jeopardized.  That Headquarters requested
his employer give the applicant a 16-week leave of absence commencing on
      11 February 1962.

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-2 provides Army policy and criteria concerning
individual military decorations.  It states that the National Defense
Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for any period
between 27 June 1950 and 27 July 1954, both dates inclusive, between 1
January 1961 and 24 August 1974, both dates inclusive, between 2 August
1990 and 30 November 1995, both dates inclusive, and between 11 September
2001 to a date to be determined.

7.  Army Regulation 635-5 prescribes the separation documents prepared for
Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military
service or control of the Army.  It establishes standardized policy for the
preparation of the DD Form 214.  In pertinent part it states that the DD
Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier’s most recent period of continuous
active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service
at the time of release from active duty, retirement or discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The 5 January 1962 letter from Headquarters, U. S. Army Staff Group,
Washington, D.C. has been carefully considered; however, it is insufficient
evidence on which to base award of the NDSM.

2.  There is no evidence that the applicant's employer allowed him the
leave of absence.  If he had been allowed that leave of absence, there is
no evidence to show he performed any required military duties in an active
duty status.

3.  If the applicant can provide a second DD Form 214 to show he served on
active duty for a period commencing on 11 February 1962, he might be
determined to be eligible for the NDSM.  In that case, the NDSM would be
issued to him and added to that DD Form 214.

4.  If the applicant can provide evidence other than a DD Form 214 to show
he served on active duty for a period commencing on 11 February 1962, he
might be determined to be eligible for the NDSM; however, in that case the
NDSM would be issued to him but it would not be authorized for entry on the
DD Form 214 for the period ending 17 December 1959.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___kah__  __rd____  __jbg___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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 to amend the decision of
the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR2003089059 dated 22 January 2004.




            __Karen A. Heinz______
                    CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004106344                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050104                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.0069                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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