PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            24 February 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999030323

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Huber		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		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 there is nothing in his military records that would have disqualified him from receiving the AGCM, which was given as a matter of policy.  Everyone else who mustered out of his company received the award and his not receiving the award was a matter of omission.  He was told when he was discharged that the error would be corrected and he did not think it would be necessary to petition for this correction of his record.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 8 August 1962 for 2 years.  He successfully completed basic training and advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Dix, New Jersey.  Upon completion of AIT he was awarded military occupational specialty 
051.10 (Radio Operator) and was assigned to Fort Chaffee, Arkansas for his first permanent duty station.

5.  The applicant served his entire period of active duty at Fort Chaffee and his service record shows that his conduct and efficiency ratings were all excellent throughout his tenure on active duty.  The record is also void of any disciplinary history or adverse information.

6.  On 7 August 1964, the applicant was discharged, in the rank of private first class/E-3, after completing 2 years of active military service.  The record contains a DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Separation or Discharge), which shows that he was separated, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of expiration of term of service (ETS), and that his service was characterized as honorable.  

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military awards.  The AGCM was established by Executive Order 8809, 28 June 1941 and was amended by Executive Order 9323, 1943 and by Executive Order 10444, 10 April 1953 and is awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active Federal military service.  The regulation also states, in pertinent part, that for first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950, a period of service of less than 3 years but more than 1 year qualifies for award of the AGCM.

8.  Paragraph 4-4 of the regulation provides the basis for award of the AGCM and states, in pertinent part, that the immediate unit commander's decision to award the AGCM will be based on his or her personal knowledge and of the individual's official records for periods of service under previous commanders during the period for which the award is to be made.  It also states, in pertinent part, that the lack of official disqualifying comment by previous commanders qualifies the use of such period toward the award by current commander.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service, the Board has determined that the applicant should have received the AGCM for his service from 8 August 1962 to 7 August 1964.  This conclusion is based on the fact that the record is void of any derogatory information, which would preclude the applicant from being awarded the AGCM, and the lack of any specific action by the applicant’s unit commander to disqualify him from receiving the award.  

2.  The Board found 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 determined that  this error should be corrected and the applicant should receive the AGCM at this time.

3.  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 AGCM for the period 
8 August 1962 to 7 August 1964.  

BOARD VOTE:  

__cla____  __jph___  ___mvt__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030323	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/02/24	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1964/08/07	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	ETS	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 46	107.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.