IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 May 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130016493 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 military records by showing he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM). 2. The applicant states his early release should not have precluded him from being awarded the AGCM. His out-processing from the Army was expedited resulting in the award not being placed in his records. 3. The applicant provides copies of: * DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) * A DA Form 2496-1 (Disposition Form), Request for Permission to Purchase and Register a Privately Owned Vehicle * Special Orders (SO) Number 157, U.S. Army Aviation Maintenance Center (USAAMC), dated 9 August 1966 * SO Number 170, USAAMC, dated 29 August 1966 * SO Number 249, Fort Hamilton, New York, dated 6 September 1966 * Letter Order, U.S. Army Reserve, dated 23 September 1969 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. On 11 October 1963, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years giving him an expiration term of service (ETS) date of 10 October 1966. He was trained as an avionics repairman and assigned to the U.S. Army Aviation Maintenance Center in the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). 3. On 31 August 1966, the applicant departed the FRG and returned to the United States. 4. On 7 September 1966, the applicant was released from active duty. He had attained the rank of specialist five, pay grade E-5, and he had completed 2 years, 10 months, and 27 days of creditable active service. His DD Form 214 shows he received the following awards: * Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar * National Defense Service Medal 5. Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows that his conduct and efficiency ratings were “excellent.” The applicant’s records do not contain any evidence of disciplinary action. There is no evidence to show that the commander took any action to deny him the Army Good Conduct Medal. 6. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, provided that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded to enlisted Soldiers who had completed a qualified 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 enlisted person must have had all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-martial. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The evidence of record clearly shows the applicant was released from active duty upon his return from overseas which was about a month prior to his ETS. 2. The applicant’s records clearly show that he distinguished himself in the performance of his military service, which is evidenced by him attaining the rank of specialist five, pay grade E-5, and achieving "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings. Therefore, it is presumed that he was not awarded the AGCM due to an oversight. Accordingly, he should be awarded this medal. BOARD VOTE: ____X____ ____X____ ___X_____ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period 11 October 1963 to 7 September 1966; and b. showing, in addition to the awards already shown on his DD Form 214, that his awards include the Army Good Conduct Medal. _______ _ __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) AR20130016493 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130016493 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1