RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        18 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050000580


      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. G. E. Vandenberg              |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. John N. Slone                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Linda D. Simmons              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin              |     |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 his records be corrected to
show all of his authorized awards.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that in the rush to build up the
military forces in Vietnam his awards and decorations were not listed on
his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge).

3.  The applicant provides a personal statement and his DD Form 214.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 22 October 1965, the date of his release from active duty.  The
application submitted in this case is dated 28 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.  The records show the applicant entered active duty on 19 October 1962,
completed training, and served in Germany from 19 September 1963 through
15 October 1965.

4.  He was honorably separated from active duty as a specialist (E-4) on
22 October 1965.  He had 3 years and 4 days of creditable service with no
time lost.  His DD Form 214 lists his awards as only the Marksman Badge
with Rifle Bar.

5.  A DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) lists his awards and
decorations as the Sharpshooter Badge with Rifle Bar and the Marksman Badge
with Rifle Bar.  It also records his conduct and efficiency ratings as
exclusively excellent.

6.  The applicant's records contain no orders for any award.

7.  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, 2 August 1990 through 30 November 1995 and 11 September 2001
to a date to be determined.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, chapter 4, states 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.  A record of punishment is not automatically disqualifying.
However, at that time, a single efficiency rating of less than excellent
was disqualifying.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good
Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.  Current practice
requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable
consideration and permits the individual to respond.  At that time, a
disqualification was normally noted on the DA Form 20.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant distinguished himself by his conduct, efficiency and
fidelity as evidenced by his conduct and efficiency ratings and promotion
to E-4.  The record contains no indication of any disqualifying incidents
or recommendations.  It is appropriate to award the applicant the Good
Conduct Medal for his period of service from 19 October 1962 though 22
October 1965.

2.  The applicant served on active duty during an authorized period for
award of the National Defense Service Medal.  Therefore his records should
be corrected to reflect this award.

3.  In addition to the Marksman Badge, the applicant also qualified as an
expert with the rifle and is authorized to wear the Expert Badge with Rifle
bar.  Therefore his records should be corrected to reflect this award.


BOARD VOTE:

__JNS___  __KWL _  __LDS __  GRANT FULL 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 awarding the applicant the Good
Conduct Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, and the Expert Badge
with Rifle Bar.





                            __      John N. Slone___________
                                      CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050000580                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051018                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     | . . . . .                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |107                                     |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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