IN THE CASE OF:	  

	BOARD DATE:	  13 May 2008

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080002551 

THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests correction of his military records to show award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

2.  The applicant states that he was put in for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, but he did not receive it.  He states, in effect, that he was pushed through processing from Frankfurt, Germany to Fort Jackson, South Carolina, where he was separated.  He believes that his award got overlooked in the rush to process everyone out of the Army.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or discharge (DD Form 214), a letter of commendation, and a letter of appreciation.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2.  On 30 June 1970, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He completed his initial training and was awarded military occupational specialty 12B (Combat Engineer).

3.  In April 1971, the applicant was assigned for duty as a combat engineer with Company A, 78th Engineer Battalion, in the Federal Republic of Germany.

4.  Special Orders Number 190, Headquarters, VII Corps, dated 17 August 1971, awarded the applicant the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar.

5.  On 9 September 1971, the applicant was promoted to the rank of specialist four, pay grade E-4.

6.  On 9 November 1972, the applicant’s company commander commended his outstanding performance of duty while assigned to Company A, 78th Engineer Battalion.  The commander stated that because of the applicant’s devotion to duty, initiative, self-discipline, and conduct, he was able to accomplish all of his assigned tasks with virtually no supervision from his superiors.  The commander further stated that he was confident that the applicant would continue to perform his duties in such an outstanding manner for the new commander.

7.  On 29 May 1973, the battalion commander commended the applicant for his performance and conduct in the VI European March of Arms.  The commander stated that because of his participation in extensive and arduous workouts, primarily on his own time, the 78th Engineer Battalion’s team placed third out of twelve United States Teams.  

8.  On or about 21 June 1973, the applicant was returned to the United States and released from active duty and transferred to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement).  He had completed 2 years, 11 months, and 
22 days of creditable active duty.

9.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 list the National Defense Service Medal and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  It does not show the Army Good Conduct Medal or the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar.



10.  The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) is not available for review.  Other than this missing document, the available records appear to be complete.  There is no evidence of any disciplinary action taken during his period of active duty service.    

11.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time when the service member was discharged, required that throughout a qualifying period of service for award of the Good Conduct Medal the enlisted person must have had all “excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-martial.  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.  With the publication of the new Army Regulation 672-5-1, in 1974, the requirement for all excellent conduct and efficiency ratings was dropped and an individual was required to show that he/she willingly complied with the demands of the military environment, had been loyal and obedient, and faithfully supported the goals of his organization and the Army.  Today, Army Regulation 600-8-22, which replaced Army Regulation 
672-5-1, notes that there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal and disqualification must be justified.  Current practice requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits the individual to respond.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The available evidence clearly shows that the applicant progressed through the ranks to specialist four and was commended by both his company and battalion commanders for his performance of duty and conduct.   

2.  The applicant was returned early from overseas and subsequently separated from active duty.  There is no evidence of record showing that the commander denied award of the Army Good Conduct Medal to the applicant.  Therefore, it is reasonable to presume that the failure to award him the Army Good Conduct Medal was an administrative oversight.

3.  In view of the above, the applicant should be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period from 30 June 1970 to 21 June 1973.

4.  Special orders awarded the applicant the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar.  Therefore, his records should be corrected to show this award.



BOARD VOTE:

____X___  ___X___  ___X____  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.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

      a.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period from 
30 June 1970 to 21 June 1973; and
      
      b.  showing, that in addition to the awards shown on his DD form 214, his awards include the Army Good Conduct Medal and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar. 





       _    ___X____   ___
       CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20070016793



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080002551



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1