PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           23 March 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999031656

	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.  

	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger Able		Member	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		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 that his DD Form 214 be corrected to show his correct date of separation.

3.  The applicant states that he was discharged on 17 May 1968.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was inducted into the Army on 20 May 1966.  He had no record of disciplinary actions and his conduct and efficiency had been rated as “excellent” throughout his term of service.  His release from active duty orders show he was separated on 17 May 1968.  His  DD Form 214, item 11d erroneously shows he was separated on 17 May 1967 after completing 1 year, 11 months and 28 days of creditable active service with no lost time.

5.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided policy and criteria concerning individual military decorations.  It stated that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940 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.  At the time, a soldier’s conduct and efficiency ratings must have been rated as “excellent” for the entire period of qualifying service.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows there is a typographical error on the applicant’s DD Form 214, item 11d.  He was separated on 17 May 1968, not 17 May 1967.

2.  The evidence of record also shows that the applicant met the eligibility criteria for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

3.  In view of the foregoing, it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the applicant the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 20 May 1966 through 17 May 1968.

2.  That the Army Good Conduct Medal be added to item 24 of the applicant’s DD Form 214.

3.  That item 11d of the applicant’s DD Form 214 be amended to read “17 May 68.”

BOARD VOTE:  

__slp___  __ra____  __jea___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Shirley L. Powell
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999031656	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000323	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.