PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:           10 OCTOBER 2001    
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001059618

	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	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. Charles Gainor		Member	
	Mr. Joe R. Schroeder		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 award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  He states, in effect, that he complied with all the demands of the military and his supervisors.  He indicates that he was being reassigned during the period he should have received the award.

3.  Records available to the Board indicate the applicant was a member of the Army National Guard when he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years on 26 April 1978.  He was initially assigned to Fort Hood, Texas and in January 1979 was transferred to Germany as part of a unit move.  In January 1980 he was promoted to pay grade E-4.  In July 1980 the applicant's installation check cashing privilege was suspended when he failed to redeem a $40.00 check from the local Post Exchange.  The check was returned by his bank for insufficient funds.  His check cashing privilege was suspended for 6 months.  There is no indication he received any other disciplinary action for this single incident.

4.  In March 1981 he was reassigned to Fort Carson, Colorado.

5.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 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.  The applicant completed a qualifying period for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal on 25 April 1981.

6.  In November 1981 the applicant was punished under Article 15 of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) for driving a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.  Civilian authorities also confined him for several days as a result of that incident.

7.  Although Army Regulation 600-8-22 notes that there is no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.  Current practice requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits the individual to respond.  There is no evidence in the applicant's official military personnel file that his commander ever disqualified him for award of the Good Conduct Medal.

8.  On 29 April 1982 he was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service.  His records do not reflect entitled to the Army Good Conduct Medal.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant completed a qualifying period of service for award of the Good Conduct Medal on 25 April 1981.  While his check cashing privilege was suspended for 6 months in July 1980, the Board notes that this was a single incident, with no indication of any more severe disciplinary action by his chain of command.  The Board believes that this single incident would not likely disqualify him from an award of the Good Conduct Medal.  

2.  There is no evidence in available records that the applicant's commander ever disqualified him from award of the Good Conduct Medal.  The applicant's contention that he was in the process of moving from one unit to another during the period he would have received the award is confirmed in evidence available to the Board.  It is possible that the applicant's chain of command overlooked his eligibility for the Good Conduct Medal during the period he was being reassigned and assimilated into his new unit and then his November 1981 UCMJ action may have impacted on any attempt to award the decoration retroactively.

3.  The applicant's conduct between 26 April 1978 and 25 April 1981, the period for which he would have been eligible for his first Army Good Conduct Medal, was honorable and as such the Board concludes it would be appropriate and in the interest of justice to award him the Good Conduct Medal for that period.

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 awarding the individual concerned the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 26 April 1978 through 25 April 1981.

BOARD VOTE:  

__LLS __  __CG ___  __ JRS__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		____Luther L. Santiful       
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001059618	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20011010	
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.