IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  16 November 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100014351 


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 award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  He also requests awards and decorations for his service in Lebanon and Turkey.

2.  The applicant states:

* He never received the Army Good Conduct Medal upon his discharge
* His company commander was sent to Frankfurt, Germany on temporary duty; therefore, the company commander was not there to process the papers for his medals and ribbons
* If there are any ribbons or medals for service with the American Land Forces in the Middle East in Lebanon and Turkey he would like to have them

3.  The applicant provides:

* a Headquarters, American Land Forces Middle East Certificate of service
* his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge)  

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.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 October 1957 for a period of 3 years.  He trained as a carpenter and served in Germany, Lebanon, and Turkey.  On 2 August 1960, he was released from active duty in the temporary rank/grade of specialist five (SP5)/E-5 after completing 2 years, 9 months, and 16 days of total active service with no time lost. 

3.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows the entry "NA" [Not Applicable] in item 
26 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized).

4.  Section 5 (Service Outside Continental United States) on the applicant's DA Form 24 (Service Record) shows he served in Beirut, Lebanon from 1 August 1958 to 10 August 1958 and in Turkey from 10 August 1958 to 18 October 1958.  His DA Form 24 also shows he received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his enlistment. 

5.  There are no orders for the Army Good Conduct Medal in the available records.

6.  There is no evidence the applicant received the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  There also is no evidence the applicant was disqualified by his chain of command from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal.   

7.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided policy and criteria concerning individual military decorations.  It stated the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940 and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  At the time, a Soldier’s conduct and efficiency ratings must have been rated as “excellent” for the entire period of qualifying service.  However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority announced the award in general orders.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal is authorized for participants in military operations within a specific geographic area during a specified time period.  An individual, who was not engaged in actual combat or equally hazardous activity, must have participated in operations or in direct support of operations for
30 consecutive or 60 nonconsecutive days.  The designated military operations and dates of eligibility for this award are specified in Army Regulation 600-8-22 and show that the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal was awarded for service in Lebanon from 1 July 1958 to 1 November 1958.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was released from active duty in the temporary rank/grade of SP5/E-5 after completing 2 years, 9 months, and 16 days of honorable active service with no time lost and no record of any disciplinary actions taken against him.  He also received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his enlistment.  As such, it appears he met the eligibility criteria for the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal based on completion of a period of qualifying service from 17 October 1957 through 2 August 1960.  Therefore, he is entitled to the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal and correction of his
DD Form 214 to show this award.

2.  Evidence of record shows the applicant served in Lebanon for 10 days in August 1958.  The governing regulation states an individual must have participated in operations or in direct support of operations for 30 consecutive or 60 nonconsecutive days.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence in which to base award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal in this case.

3.  Although records show the applicant served in Turkey from 10 August to
18 October 1958, there are no designated awards for such service during his period of service.  Therefore, he is not entitled to any awards for his service in Turkey.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X____  ____X____  ____X____  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.  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 (first award) for the period 
17 October 1957 through 2 August 1960; and

	b.  adding to item 26 of his DD Form 214 the Army Good Conduct Medal (first award).

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 awards for his service in Lebanon and Turkey.



      ___________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)                                         AR20100014351



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100014351



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1