IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 March 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090016979 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that he be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM). 2. The applicant states that he believes that he should have received the award of the AGCM and just learned that many of the people he served with received their award of the AGCM. He also states that he was not in any trouble and never received any nonjudicial punishment. 3. The applicant provides a letter explaining his request, a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty), and four certificates. 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 was inducted into the Army of the United States in Oakland, CA on 8 February 1971 and was transferred to Fort Lewis, WA to undergo his initial entry training (IET). On 17 February 1971, while in the reception station, he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for a period of 3 years. 3. He completed his IET and was transferred to Fort Benning, GA to undergo airborne training. He completed his training and was transferred to Fort Bragg, NC where he remained until he was initially transferred to Germany and then to Vicenza, Italy. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 3 March 1972. 4. He remained in Italy until he was returned to Fort Dix, NJ and was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) on 6 February 1974 as an early overseas returnee. He had served 2 years, 11 months, and 29 days of total active service. Item 26 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 issued at the time of his REFRAD shows that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Parachutist Badge, and the Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar. 5. His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) is not available; however, a review of his official records fails to show any derogatory information that would serve to disqualify him for award of the AGCM or any action by the commander disqualifying him for award of the AGCM. 6. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards and Decorations), in effect at the time, established the criteria for award of the AGCM which is awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active Federal military service. The regulation also stated, 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 qualified for award of the AGCM. There is no automatic entitlement to award of the AGCM; however, the commander must notify the individual Soldier of his intent to deny award of the AGCM and provide the Soldier the opportunity to respond. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service, it appears that the applicant should have received the AGCM for his service from 8 February 1971 through 6 February 1974. 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. Therefore, it must be presumed that the failure to award him the AGCM was the result of an administrative error. Accordingly, it would be in the interest of equity and justice to award him the AGCM at this time. BOARD VOTE: __X____ ___X____ ___X____ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 8 February 1971 through 6 February 1974 and adding this award to item 26 of his DD Form 214. _________X___________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090016979 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090016979 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1