IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 August 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20230000472 APPLICANT REQUESTS: correction of his military service record to reflect award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the 3-year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code (USC), section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states, in pertinent part, he served in the Army from 1959-1961 and was discharged under honorable conditions. He completed his service in National Guard honorably. He was discharged for the good of the service in 1966, and he had no court-martials. His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows excellent service, but he was not awarded the Good Conduct Medal. He served in Germany twice, and Korea. In 1965, he graduated from the from the 7th Army Noncommissioned Officer Academy, 17th out of a class of 146. 3. A review of the applicant's service record reflects the following: a. On 3 February 1959, he was inducted into the Army of the United States. He held military occupational specialty 112.0, Heavy Weapons Infantryman. He served in Germany from around 3 August 1959 to around 19 January 1961. b. One of the applicant’s DA Form 24 (Service Record) shows he received "Excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings from 3 February 1959 to 19 January 1961. c. He was honorably released from active duty on 19 January 1961 for early release as an overseas returnee. His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for this period shows he completed 1 year, 11 months, and 17 days of net service. Item 26 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) is void of any entry. d. On 5 February 1961, he enlisted in the California Army National Guard (CAARNG). He was honorably discharged from the CAARNG on 1 May1961. His NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service in the Army National Guard of California), does not list any awards or decorations. e. On 26 January 1963, he enlisted in the Regular Army. He served in Korea from 5 April 1963 to 20 April 1964. f. Another of the applicants DA Forms 24, shows the applicant received: • Excellent conduct and efficiency ratings from 20 January 1961 to 30 November 1961 • Satisfactory conduct and efficiency ratings from 1 December 1961 to 30 June 1962 • Unknown conduct and efficiency ratings from 1 July 1962 to 6 November 1962 g. He was honorably discharged on 9 February 1964 for immediate reenlistment. His DD Form 214 for this period of service shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-205 (Personnel Separations Discharge and Release Convenience of the Government), paragraph 3. He completed 1 year and 14 days of active service. Item 26 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaigns Awarded or Authorized) shows Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-1). h. The applicant immediately reenlisted in the Regular Army on 10 February 1964. His DA Form 20 shows the following entries: (1) Item 31 (Foreign Service) shows: • Germany from 3 August 1959 to 19 January 1961 • Korea from 5 April 1963 to 20 April 1964 • Germany from 25 May 1964 to 13 January 1966 • Vietnam from 8 March 1966 to 2 October 1966 (he was assigned to Company A, 2nd Battalion, 16th Infantry Regiment) (2) Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) shows: • Specialist Four (SP4)/E-4 on 10 September 1963 • Sergeant (SGT)/E-5 Temporary on 17 December 1964 • Private (PVT) on 29 September 1966 for Misconduct • SGT/E-5 with a retroactive effective date of 17 December 1964 per Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on 29 April 1980 (3) Item 38 (Record of Assignments) shows he received all "excellent" in conduct and efficiency but an Undesirable Discharge on 19 October 1966. (4) Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) shows: Vietnam Service Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Combat Infantryman Badge, and Vietnam Campaign Medal. (5) Item 44 (Time Lost Under Section 972, Title 10, USC and Subsequent to Normal Date Expiration Term of Service) shows absent without leave from 12 October 1966 to 18 October 1966 totaling 7 days. i. The applicant was discharged from active duty on 19 October 1966 with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. His DD Form 214 for this period of service shows he was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 (Discharge for the Good of the Service) by reason of Administrative Discharge – Conduct Triable by Court-Martial. • Item 12c (Net Active Service this Period) shows a net active service this period of 2 years, 8 months, and 3 days. • Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) reflects: National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, Combat Infantryman Badge, and Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle and Mortar Bars • Item 29 (Dates of Time Lost During this Period) shows 7 days lost under Section 10, USC 972: 12 October 1966 – 18 October 1966. j. On 29 April 1980, the Army Discharge Review Board upgraded the applicant’s character of service to fully honorable. He was reissued a DD Form 214, reflective of an honorable characterization of service. k. On 3 April 1987, he was issued a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) was issued amending item number 14 (Military Education), adding the Non-commissioned Officer (NCO) Academy/4 weeks/1965/Nothing Follows. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was warranted. The applicant's contentions, the military record, and regulatory guidance were carefully considered. The evidence of record shows the applicant served on active duty from 3 February 1959 to 19 January 1961, completing 1 year, 11 months, and 17 days of active service, received all "excellent" conduct/efficiency during this period, and his record is void of derogatory information. The Board determined he met the criteria for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 xx: xx: xx: GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is 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, in addition to the corrections addressed in Administrative Note(s) below, by: • awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for service during the period 3 February 1959 through 19 January 1961 • adding award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) to his DD Form 214 ending on 19 October 1966 8/22/2023 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): 1. Reference the enclosed request for correction of military records from the subject individual to correct his DD Form 214 for the period ending 19 October 1966 by adding: • Korea Defense Service Medal. • 2 bronze service stars to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal • Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation • Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class 2. A review of the records listed below (enclosed) is sufficient to substantiate correction of the DD Form 214 without action by the Board. • DD Form 214, ending 9 February 1964 • DD Form 214, ending 19 October 1966 • DA Form 20 • Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 8, dated 1974 • DAGO Number 53, dated 1970 • AR 600-8-22 (Military Awards) 3. Please correct the applicant's DD Forms 214 by amending them and adding the awards shown in paragraph 1a and b above. Provide the applicant a copy of the corrections, and as applicable the medals. Please ensure that the corrections are recorded in the applicant's official military personnel record. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, 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 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. 2. AR 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Army Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency, and fidelity. Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified. Any one of the following periods of continuous enlisted active Federal military service qualifies for award: • Each 3 years completed on or after 27 August 1940 • For first award only, 1 year served entirely during the period 7 December 1941 to 2 March 1946 • For first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year • For first award only, upon termination of service, on or after 27 June 1950, of less than 1 year when final separation was by reason of physical disability incurred in line of duty 3. Army Regulation 600-65 (Service Medals), in effect at the time, stated 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; for first award only, 1 year served entirely during the period 7 December 1941 to 2 March 1946; 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. A Soldier's conduct and efficiency ratings, including those pertinent to attendance at service schools, must have all been recorded as "excellent" or higher, except that ratings of "Unknown" for portions of the period under consideration, and service school efficiency (emphasis in the original) ratings of less than "excellent" entered prior to 3 March 1946, would not be disqualifying. There must have been no convictions by court-martial. However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority announced the award in general orders. //NOTHING FOLLOWS//