RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        11 January 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060007775


      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. Bernard P. Ingold             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Ronald D. Gant                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Edward E. Montgomery          |     |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 his records be corrected by showing he was
awarded the Good Conduct Medal.

2.  The applicant states he earned the Good Conduct Medal and would like to
have it listed on his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation).

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a 4 May 2006
letter from the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), St. Louis,
Missouri.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on  2 February 1954, the date of his separation from active duty.
The application submitted in this case is dated 26 May 2006.

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 applicant's service records are believed to have been destroyed in
the fire at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  The only
documents available are a copy of the DD Form 214 and a 4 May 2006 National
Personnel Records Center letter.

4.  The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant enlisted and entered on active
duty on 5 July 1950 and attained the rank of sergeant on 4 January 1953.
He served for 2 years, 11 months, and 13 days, being honorably released
from active duty on 2 February 1954.  His awards are listed as the National
Defense Service Medal and the Army of Occupation of Germany Medal.

5.  An NPRC letter, dated 4 May 2006, states the applicant's authorized
awards are the Good Conduct Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, and
the Army of Occupation of Germany Medal.


6.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), chapter 4 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.  A record of punishment is not automatically
disqualifying.  At that time, a single conduct or efficiency rating of less
than excellent was disqualifying.

7.  Army Regulation 15-185 (Boards, Commissions, and Committees - Army
Board for Correction of Military Records), paragraph 2–15 (Reconsideration
of Army Board for Correction of Military Records decision) states that an
applicant may request the reconsideration of an ABCMR decision under the
following circumstances:

      a.  If the ABCMR receives the request for reconsideration within 1
year of the ABCMR’s original decision and if the ABCMR has not previously
reconsidered the matter, the ABCMR staff will review the request to
determine if it contains evidence (including, but not limited to, any facts
or arguments as to why relief should be granted) that was not in the record
at the time of the ABCMR’s prior consideration.  If new evidence has been
submitted, the request will be submitted to the ABCMR for its determination
of whether the new evidence is sufficient to demonstrate material error or
injustice.  If no new evidence is found, the ABCMR staff will return the
application to the applicant without action; and

      b.  If the ABCMR receives a request for reconsideration more than 1
year after the ABCMR’s original decision or after the ABCMR has already
considered one request for reconsideration, then the case will be returned
without action and the applicant will be advised the next remedy is appeal
to a court of appropriate jurisdiction.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's military records were requested from the NPRC
repository in St. Louis, Missouri with no documentation being made
available to the Board  except a copy of the 4 May 2006 NPRC letter.

2.  The totality of available official military personnel records for the
applicant's service is the DD Form 214 which was provided by the applicant.

3.  Whatever source document NPRC may have used to justify their inclusion
of the Good Conduct Medal, as an authorized award, is neither identified in
their letter nor made available to the Board.

4.  Unless NPRC has documents that it did not make available to the Board
or the applicant has additional documents, the DD Form 214 by itself is
insufficient to show whether or not the applicant qualified for award of
the Good Conduct Medal.

5.  Regrettably, the Board must apply the presumption of regularity in
governmental affairs and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, deny
the applicant's request to add the Good Conduct Medal to his DD Form 214.

6.  If the applicant has additional evidence to submit he should do so
within 1 year of the date of this decision.

7.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 2 February 1954; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 1 February 1957.  The applicant did not file within
the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling
explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice
to excuse failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

__BPI ___  __RDG__  __EEM _  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  Notwithstanding the staff DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS above, the Board
determined during their review that the evidence presented was sufficient
to warrant a recommendation for relief and to excuse failure to timely
file.  Based on the National Personnel Records Center letter and the
evidence in the
application this request should be granted, the members DD Form 214
reflects no misconduct or lost days.  While the individual was 17 days
short of 3 years, the 3 year requirement should be waived as a matter of
equity.

2.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army
Records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding the Good
Conduct Medal for the period 20 February 1951 through 2 February 1954.




                                  __     Bernard P. Ingold_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060007775                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070111                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |  . . . . .                             |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |107                                     |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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