PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           31 July 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001058936

	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. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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, that he be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM). 

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that the AGCM is not listed on his Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge (DD Form 214).  In support of his application, he submits a copy of his DD Form 214.

4.  The applicant’s military record shows that on 18 February 1963, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91B (Medical Specialist) and successfully served in assignments at Fort Campbell, Kentucky and the Republic of Vietnam.  The highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist four/E-4.

5.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that he received excellent conduct and efficiency ratings in all assignments.  In addition, his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) contains no derogatory information and no indication that he was ever disqualified from receiving the AGCM by any of the unit commanders for which he served.

6.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that on 8 February 1966, he was honorably released from active duty after having completed 2 years, 11 months, 
and 21 days of active military service.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the AGCM 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 for the first award, which is authorized for a period of service of more than 1 year at the termination of a period of Federal military service.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the AGCM, disqualification must be justified and current practice requires that unit commanders provide written notice of non-favorable consideration and allow individuals the opportunity to respond/rebut the reason for denial of the award. 

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) is awarded for any period of honorable active service performed during the following periods:  27 July 1950 and 27 July 1954; 
1 January 1961 and 14 August 1974; and 2 August 1990 and 30 November 1995.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board noted the applicant’s contention that he is entitled to receive the AGCM and finds this claim has merit.  After carefully examining his record of service, the Board concludes that he should have received the first award of the AGCM based on the record being void of any derogatory information and the lack of a specific recommendation from any of his unit commanders that he be disqualified from receiving the award. 

2.  The Board concludes that the applicant not receiving the AGCM was likely the result of an administrative error as opposed to it being the result of a conscious disqualification by any of the unit commanders for which he served.  Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Board finds it would be appropriate to correct the record at this time to show he received the AGCM for his honorable service from 
18 February 1963 to 8 February 1966.  

3.  In addition, the evidence of record confirms that the applicant served a qualifying period of service that entitled him to receive the NDSM and the Board concludes it would also be appropriate to add this award to his record.

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

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing the individual concerned was awarded the NDSM, the AGCM for the period 18 February 1963 to 8 February 1966 and by providing him a corrected separation document that includes these awards. 

BOARD VOTE:  

__WTM  _  __AAO __  __JTM__   GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		__Walter T. Morrison__
		      CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001058936	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/07/31	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.