BOARD DATE: 19 September 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130001832 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests correction of his records to show award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM). 2. The applicant states he qualified expert with both the rifle and automatic rifle. He was awarded the Expert Infantryman Badge, served in Korea as an Honor Guard at Governor Island, and met the criteria for the AGCM. His records were recently corrected by the Army; however, he was not awarded the AGCM. 3. The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) and DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 June 1960 for a period of 3 years. He was awarded military occupational specialty 111 (Light Weapons Infantryman). 3. The applicant's DA Form 24 (Service Record) shows in: a. section 1 (Appointments, Promotions, or Reductions) he was: * advanced to private (PV2)/pay grade E-2 on 25 October 1960 * promoted to private first class (PFC)/pay grade E-3 on 23 February 1961 * reduced to PV2/E-2 on 4 June 1961 (misconduct) * promoted to PFC/E-3 on 1 October 1962 * reduced to PV2/E-2 on 11 December 1962 (misconduct) * promoted to PFC/E-3 on 11 March 1963 b. section 4 (Chronological Record of Military Service): he received conduct and efficiency ratings of "excellent" throughout his military service. It also shows he was assigned to: * Company A, 2nd Brigade, 34th Infantry (Korea), from 16 February to 19 September 1962 * Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Jay, NY, from 20 September 1962 to 19 June 1963 4. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was honorably released from active duty on 20 June 1963 and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve. a. He completed 3 years of net active service that included 1 year, 3 months, and 5 days of foreign service. b. Item 26 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized), as corrected by a DD Form 215 issued on 18 August 2011, shows he was awarded the: * Expert Infantryman Badge * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle and Automatic Rifle Bars * two Letters of Appreciation * two Letters of Commendation * Korea Defense Service Medal 5. A review of the applicant's available military service records failed to reveal any evidence he was recommended for award of the AGCM by his commander or that he was awarded the AGCM. This review also failed to show he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal. 6. Army Regulation 600-65 (Awards), in effect at the time, stated the AGCM was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940; for first award only, 1 year served entirely during the period 7 December 1941 to 2 March 1946; and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year. A Soldier's conduct and efficiency ratings, including those pertinent to attendance at service schools, must have all been recorded as "excellent" or higher, except that ratings of "unknown" for portions of the period under consideration, and service school efficiency (emphasis in the original) ratings of less than "excellent" entered prior to 3 March 1946, would not be disqualifying. There must have been no convictions by court-martial. However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a positive recommendation for the award and until the awarding authority announced the award in general orders. 7. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning military awards and decorations. The National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 27 July 1950 and 27 July 1954, 1 January 1961 and 14 August 1974, 2 August 1990 and 30 November 1995, and 11 September 2001 and a date to be determined. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that his records should be corrected to show award of the AGCM because he met the criteria for the award. 2. The applicant served a continuous 3-year period of honorable active duty enlisted service from 21 June 1960 through 20 June 1963. a. Records show the applicant received conduct and efficiency ratings of "excellent" throughout his period of military service. b. Records also show the applicant was reduced in rank for misconduct on two occasions (i.e., on 4 June 1962 and 11 December 1962). These two incidents of misconduct occurred during the last 13 months of the applicant's 3-year period of active service. c. There is no evidence that the applicant's unit commander recommended him for award of the AGCM (1st Award) at the time he was separated from active duty. In addition, there are no orders or other evidence showing he was awarded the AGCM (1st Award). d. Therefore, based on the evidence of misconduct, the applicant is not entitled to award of the AGCM (1st Award). 3. The evidence of record shows the applicant qualified for award of the National Defense Service Medal based on his active duty service during the Vietnam War. 4. Evidence shows that the applicant's records contain an administrative error which does not require action by the Board. Therefore, administrative correction of the applicant's records will be accomplished by the Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA), Case Management Division (CMD), as outlined by the Board in paragraph 2 of the BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___X__ ___X_____ ___X_____ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 2. The Board determined that an administrative error in the records of the individual concerned should be corrected. Therefore, the Board requests that the ARBA CMD administratively correct the records of the individual concerned by adding the National Defense Service Medal to item 26 of his DD Form 214. _______ _ X _______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130001832 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130001832 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1