PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           2 April 2002 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001065599

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		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 his record be corrected to show he was promoted to the rank and pay grade of sergeant/E-5 (SGT/E-5) prior to his separation from active duty. 

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was promoted from the rank and pay grade of specialist four/E-4 (SP4/E-4) to SGT/E-5, effective 1 April 1978 with a date of rank (DOR) of 26 March 1978, and his separation document (DD Form 214) erroneously lists his rank and pay grade as SP4/E-4.  In support of his application, he provides a copy of his promotion order to SGT/E-5. 

4.  The applicant’s military record shows that he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) on 22 May 1978, at the expiration of his term of service (ETS), after completing a total of 3 years of active military service.  Item 6a (Rank)/6b (Grade) of his DD Form 214 contains the entries SP4/E-4, indicating that this was the rank and pay grade he held on the date of his separation. 

5.  The applicant’s Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1) and Orders 
65-127, dated 30 March 1978, issued by Headquarters, US Army Air Defense Center and Fort Bliss, Texas, confirm that he was promoted to the rank and pay grade of SGT/E-5, effective 1 April 1978, with a DOR of 26 March 1978.  

6.  The applicant’s record also contains a copy of Orders 67-37, dated 3 April 1978, issued by Headquarters, US Army Air Defense Center and Fort Bliss, Texas, which awarded the applicant the skill level 2 (E-5) with his military occupation specialty (MOS) and that withdrew skill level 1 (E-1 through E-4), effective 1 April 1978, which further confirms he was promoted to SGT/E-5 on that date.  

7.  The applicant’s record is also void of any derogatory information and there is no indication that he was ever disqualified from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) by any of the unit commanders for which he served during his tenure on active duty.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes the Army’s awards policy.  Chapter 4 contains guidance on awarding the AGCM and it states, in pertinent part, that it is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  It also establishes a period of 3 years of active military service as the normal qualifying period for award of the AGCM.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board notes the contention of the applicant that he was promoted to SGT/E-5 prior to his separation and it finds this claim has merit.  The evidence of record clearly establishes that prior to his separation on 22 May 1978, he was promoted to SGT/E-5, effective 1 April 1978, with a DOR of 26 March 1978.  Therefore, the Board finds his record should be corrected to reflect this promotion. 

2.  The evidence of record also verifies that the applicant served a 3 year qualifying period of service that entitles him to receive the AGCM.  Therefore, lacking any derogatory information on file that would disqualify him from receiving this award or a formal disqualification by any of the unit commanders for which he served, the Board concludes it would also be appropriate to award him 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 promoted to the rank of SGT/E-5, effective 1 April 1978, with a DOR of 26 March 1978; by awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for his honorable active military service from 23 May 1975 to 22 May 1978; and by providing him a corrected separation document that reflects these changes.

BOARD VOTE:  

__WTM__  __CLG__  __RKS__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		____Walter T Morrison___
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001065599	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/04/02	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.