MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           5 September 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001065491

	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. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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:  Reconsideration of his request for award of a seventh Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the Board's previous consideration of his request was incorrect in that the Board stated that he served continuously on active duty from his initial enlistment on 15 August 1946 through his separation by reason of sufficient service for retirement on 31 October 1966.  He states this is incorrect because his first period of active service ended on 16 February 1948 when he was separated and assigned to the Enlisted Reserve Corps (ERC).  He had a break in active service from 17 February 1948 through 13 April 1948 and, he reentered active service on 14 April 1948 then served continuously until his retirement.  He believes, in effect, that he is entitled to a GCMDL for his initial period of active service from 15 August 1946 through 16 February 1948 and then every 3 years from 14 April 1948 until his retirement.

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 26 August 1999 (case number AR1999019146).  The applicant provides a copy of his WD Form 53 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation - Honorable Discharge) showing that he was inactive in the ERC from 17 February 1948 through 13 April 1948.

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

1.  Although the applicant is correct in stating that his initial period of active service was from 15 August 1946 through 16 February 1948 and that he was not on active duty from 17 February 1948 through 13 April 1948, he is not entitled to a GCMDL for his first period of service.

2.  As the applicant was previously informed on 26 August 1999, pertinent Army regulations provide that, after 27 August 1940, 3 years of qualifying service was required for award of the GCMDL, except during World War II when the first award could be made based on as little as 1 year of qualifying service if served between 7 December 1941 and 2 March 1946.  The applicant's first period of service began on 15 August 1946 -- outside the window for World War II consideration -- therefore he would have had to serve until 14 August 1949.  He only served until 16 February 1948, thus he did not qualify for the award.

3.  As correctly stated in the Board's 26 August 1999 consideration, the applicant is entitled to six awards of the GCMDL.

4.  The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

5.  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

__cla___  __mhm___  __jtm___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001065491	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020905	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0056	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.