PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:         14 October 1998      
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-10598

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Kenneth Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest M. Willcher		Member	
	Mr. Robert W. Garrett		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, 
	             if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  In effect, the applicant requests that all his awards be included on his 
DD Form 214; and he requests award of the Good Conduct Medal.

3.  The applicant states that all his awards, to include the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross w/Palm Unit Citation, should be included on his DD Form 214, and he should be awarded the Good Conduct Medal because his under other than honorable discharge was upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was inducted into the Army on 
9 December 1969 and completed training as an aircraft repairman.  He was AWOL for 15 days from 5 July to 19 July 1970.  In August 1970 he was assigned to a transportation unit in Vietnam and was promoted to pay grade E-4 on 
1 December 1970.  He was discharged on 19 March 1971 and reenlisted the next day for three years.  He was awarded the Army Commendation Medal for his service in Vietnam, completed his tour and in September 1971 was assigned to Hunter Army Airfield in Georgia.  He participated in three campaigns during his tour in Vietnam, and the unit to which he was assigned was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and the Meritorious Unit Commendation Medal.   

5.  From March 1972 to February 1973 the applicant was AWOL on six separate occasions totaling 84 days.  On 21 February 1973 the applicant consulted with counsel and requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He stated that he understood the nature and consequences of the under other than honorable discharge that he might receive.  He declined to submit statements in his own behalf.  The applicant’s commanding officer, in forwarding that request, stated that the applicant’s conduct and efficiency were both unsatisfactory.  On 9 March 1973 the separation authority approved his request and directed that he receive an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.   He was discharged at Fort Stewart, Georgia on 15 March 1973 in the rank of Private E-1. He had 2 years, 11 months, and 11 days of service, and 103 days of lost time.  His DD Form 214 shows award of the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM), 2 O/S (overseas service) bars, and the Expert Qualification Badge with rifle bar.

6.  As a result of a decision by the Army Discharge Review Board under the provisions of the special discharge review program (SDRP), the applicant’s discharge was upgraded to “under honorable conditions” effective 
12 January 1978.   On 26 April 1978 the ADRB affirmed the applicant’s upgrade of his discharge under the SDRP.

7.  On 26 July 1985 the Army Reserve Personnel Center at St. Louis requested that the Army support activity at Philadelphia issue the applicant the following awards:  the ARCOM, NDSM, VSM w/3 bronze service stars, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, and the Expert Qualification Badge with rifle bar.  Additionally, that agency informed the applicant that he was authorized the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation,  however, it was a foreign award and not issued by DA. 

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides for the award of the Good Conduct Medal, and states, in pertinent part, that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active Federal military service.
Throughout a qualifying period, each enlisted soldier must meet all of the following criteria for an award: (1) the immediate commander evaluates the soldier’s character as above reproach, and (2) the record of service indicates that the soldier has willingly complied with the demands of the military environment, been loyal and obedient to their superiors, faithfully supported the goals of their organization and the Army, and conducted themselves in such an exemplary manner as to distinguish them from fellow soldiers.  There is no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander has approved the award and the award has been announced in permanent orders.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant received the awards as indicated.  Additionally, he should have been awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation Medal.  All his awards should be indicated on his DD Form 214.

2.  The Board notes that the applicant’s discharge was upgraded to under honorable conditions (general).  However, that action has no bearing on his entitlement to award of the Good Conduct Medal.  His service, as evidenced by his record, most assuredly does not merit award of that medal.  

3.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was awarded the Army Commendation Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze service stars, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the Expert Qualification Badge with rifle bar, and the Meritorious Unit Commendation Medal.
2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied 

BOARD VOTE:  

_JNS___  __EMW_  __RWG___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON