RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 January 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070010764 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. Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano Director Ms. Deyon D. Battle Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Mr. David K. Haasenritter Chairperson Mr. James R. Hastie Member Mr. Edward E. Montgomery Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. 2. The applicant states that he believes that he is entitled to the Army Good Conduct Medal. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his Enlisted Record and Report of Separation (WD AGO Form 53-55); a copy of his Honorable Discharge Certificate; a copy of his Separation Qualification Record; and a copy of a City Court of the City of New York, Kings County, Court Order, dated 20 October 1953, verifying that he legally changed his last name. 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. The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board. This case is being considered using records, which primarily consist of documentation submitted by the applicant. 3. On 20 February 1946, the applicant enlisted in the Army in New York City, New York, and he successfully completed his training as a radio operator. 4. The applicant was honorably discharged on 2 August 1947, due to demobilization. The WD AGO Form 53-55 that he was furnished at the time of his discharge shows that he was awarded the World War II Victory Medal; the Army of Occupation Medal, with Japan Clasp; the Army Lapel Button; and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-1). 5. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Army Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency, and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service. The regulation states that, after 27 August 1940, three years of qualifying service was required for award of the Good Conduct Medal, but during the World War II era, the first award could be made based on one year of qualifying service provided that service occurred between 7 December 1941 to 2 March 1946. The current standard for award of the Good Conduct Medal is 3 years of qualifying service, but as little as one year is required for the first award in those cases when the period of service ends with the termination of Federal military service. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's records are not available to the Board. Therefore, it is difficult, at best, to determine whether the applicant is entitled to award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. 2. While, the available records show that he was honorably discharged from the Army and that he was awarded the World War II Victory Medal; the Army of Occupation Medal, with Japan Clasp; the Army Lapel Button; and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-1), there is simply insufficient information available to determine whether he is entitled to be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that what the Army did in his case was correct. 3. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement. 4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __JRH__ __DKH__ __EEM___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. ___David K. Haasenritter___ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070010764 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20080125 TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION DENY REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 46 107.0000/AWARDS AND DECORATIONS 2. 102 107.0056/ARMY GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL 3. 4. 5. 6.