MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           16 July 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002069686

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Lee Cates		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	M r. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. 		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected to show entitlement to award of the Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL).

APPLICANT STATES: That there is no GCMDL on his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).  In effect, he indicates the Army sent him a GDMDL but failed to include it on his DD Form 214.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:

On 3 September 1963, the applicant enlisted in the Army for 3 years.  He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 911 (Medical Specialist).  He attained pay grade E-3 effective 12 May 1964.

On 21 September 1964, he was honorably discharged under Army Regulation 635-205, for immediate reenlistment on 22 September 1964.  His DD Form 214 indicates he had 1 year and 19 days of creditable service.

During the period 4 March 1965 to 6 September 1967, he was issued nonjudicial punishment on 4 occasions for misconduct and for disobeying lawful orders from his superior commissioned officers.  His punishments included forfeitures and reprimands.

During the period 14 February to 7 April 1965, his commander rated his conduct as unsatisfactory.

On 12 September 1967, he was honorably separated under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, based on his early release as an overseas returnee.  His DD Form 214 indicates a total of 4 years and 10 days of creditable service.

On 17 July 1990, the Army Reserve Personnel Center Adjutant General erroneously authenticated a DA Form 1577 (Authorization for Issuance of Awards) authorizing issuance of the GCMDL to the applicant.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the GCMDL is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  The regulation states that, after 27 August 1940, three years of qualifying service was required for award of the GCMDL.  The current standard for award of the GCMDL is 3 years of qualifying service, but as little as one year is required for the first award in those cases when the period of service ends with the termination of Federal military service.

DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, is concluded:

1.  The evidence of record clearly shows the applicant did not meet the requirements for award of the GCMDL.  His discharge on 21 September 1964 did not terminate his Federal service.  He was immediately reenlisted on                 22 September 1964.  He did not qualify for the award based on his unsatisfactory rating.

2.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________ GRANT

________  ________  ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_DPH___  _FNE___  _MHM___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002069686	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020716	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.