PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            27 May 1999       
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999016661

	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	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Edward Williamson		Chairperson	
	Ms. Meta Waller		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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.  The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his military records to show two awards of the Good Conduct Medal and to show the Expert Qualification Badge for the M-1 Rifle, the M-14 Rifle, the Carbine, the 45 Caliber Pistol and the
3.5 inch Rocket Launcher.  He also requests award of all Vietnam era medals and that a correspondence course titled “Introduction to Nuclear Theory” be added to his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge). 

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he has two honorable discharges and never received a Good Conduct Medal for either tour of duty.  He contends that his arms qualification was expert with the M-1, the M-14, the Carbine, the
45 Caliber and the 3.5 Rocket Launcher.  He also contends that is qualified for all Vietnam era medals because his unit participated in “Operation Long Pass” in 1960 which took a naval ship to Subic Bay, Philippines, and then dispersed to various locations which included Vietnam.  In support of his application, he submits a letter of explanation dated 14 June 1998 wherein he states that he completed a correspondence course titled “Introduction to Nuclear Theory” in 1964.         

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted on 1 December 1958 for a period of 3 years.  He served as a lineman in Korea from 23 March 1960 to
8 May 1960 and served in Okinawa from 8 May 1960 to 23 August 1961.  He was honorably discharged in the rank of E-3 on 28 February 1962 and transferred to the Army Reserve. 

5.  The applicant reenlisted on 2 October 1962 for a period of 3 years.  He served as a lineman in Germany from 11 November 1962 until he was separated on
3 June 1964 with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-209, for unsuitability due to character and behavior disorders.    

6.  The applicant’s DD Forms 214, which were authenticated in his own hand, do not show any award of the Good Conduct Medal, any Vietnam medals or any Expert Qualification Badges as authorized awards.  The Board noted that the applicant’s DD Form 214 with an effective date of 3 June 1964 does show the Marksman (Rifle M-14) as an authorized award.   

7.  On 4 July 1964, the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.  He cited that the discharge had caused him great pain, hardship and unemployment.  He contended that a great injustice had been done to him and his family and he was seeking restitution.  The ADRB denied his appeal on 17 September 1964.

8.  On 22 October 1974, the applicant applied to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.  On
4 December 1974 the ABCMR upgraded the applicant’s discharge to honorable.

9.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s personnel records that he was considered for the first award of the Good Conduct Medal.  There also is no evidence of record that his chain of command took any action to disqualify him from receiving the Good Conduct Medal.     

10.  There is no evidence of record that shows the applicant met the qualifications for or was recommended for the second award of the Good Conduct Medal.

11.  The applicant’s personnel records do not show any evidence that he served in Vietnam.   

12.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s personnel records which indicate he qualified expert for any weapon.  Sections 9 (Medals, Decorations, and Citations) of the applicant’s DA Forms 24 (Service Record) do not contain any expert qualification badges.  Items 28 (Qualification in Arms) of the applicant’s DA Forms 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) do not contain any “expert” entries. 

13.  Sections 9 (Medals, Decorations, and Citations) of the applicant’s DA Forms 24 (Service Record), show the applicant is entitled to award of the Marksman Badge (M-1 Rifle) and the Marksman Badge (Carbine). 

14.  The applicant’s personnel records fail to show that he completed a correspondence course on “Introduction to Nuclear Theory” in 1964.  Item
28 (Service Schools or Colleges, College Training Courses and/or Post-Graduate Courses Successfully Completed) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 with an effective date of 3 June 1964 shows “None”. 

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) 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.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.  

16.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, in pertinent part, sets forth requirements for award of basic marksmanship qualification badge.  The qualification badge is awarded to indicate the degree in which an individual has qualified in a prescribed record course, and an appropriate bar is furnished to denote each weapon with which the individual has qualified.  The qualification badges are in three classes:  Expert, Sharpshooter, and Marksman.

17.  Army Regulation 635-5 serves as the authority for preparation of the
DD Form 214.  It states, in pertinent part, that in-service training courses completed during the period covered by the DD Form 214 will be entered in item 28.  Training courses for combat skills will not be entered.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board determined that the applicant is entitled to the first award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period of 1 December 1958 through 30 November 1961 based on completion of 3 years of qualifying active duty enlisted service.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his military records to show this award.

2.  There is no evidence that the applicant served an additional period of qualifying service (three years) for entitlement to the second award of the Good Conduct Medal.  Therefore, he is not entitled to the second award of the Good Conduct Medal. 

3.  There is no evidence of record available to the Board, and the applicant provided no evidence, which shows he served in Vietnam.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his military records to show any medal or decoration for Vietnam service.

4.  Contrary to the applicant’s contention that his arms qualification was expert for the M-1 Rifle, the M-14 Rifle, the Carbine, the 45 Caliber Pistol and the
3.5 inch Rocket Launcher, there is no evidence of record available to the Board, and the applicant provided no evidence, which supports this contention.

5.  The evidence of record shows the applicant received marksmanship qualification badges for the M-1 Rifle and the Carbine, not expert.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his military records to show award of the Marksmanship Badge (M-1 Rifle) and the Marksmanship Badge (Carbine).    

6.  There is no evidence available to the Board, and the applicant has provided no evidence, which shows he completed a correspondence course for “Introduction to Nuclear Theory” in 1964.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his military records to show this course.

7.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records 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 first award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period of 1 December 1958 through 
30 November 1961, the Marksmanship Badge  (Rifle M-1) and the Marksmanship Badge (Carbine).

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied. 

BOARD VOTE:  

EW_____  MW_____  KLW____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		Edward Williamson_____
		CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999016661	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990527	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19640603	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-209  	
DISCHARGE REASON	UNSUITABILITY DUE TO CHARACTER AND BEHAVIOR DISORDERS	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT 	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.