MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            21 December 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000050089

	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. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz		Member	
	Ms. Gail J. Wire		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:  That she be awarded the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) in lieu of the award of the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM).

APPLICANT STATES:  That while serving with the 331st Combat Support Hospital in an Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) status in Utica, New York, she submitted several awards through the chain of command.  Those awards were lost on three occasions.  She sought assistance from the Inspector General at the 77th Regional Support Command and could obtain no satisfaction.  She then contacted the Inspector General at the Army Reserve Personnel Command    (AR-PERSCOM) at St. Louis and the Army Reserve Command.  It was determined that the 77th did not respond appropriately to award actions; consequently, her award would be processed.  The commander of the 77th downgraded the recommendation for award of the MSM to an award of the ARCOM.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

On 4 April 1998 the applicant’s supervisor, the chief nurse of the 331st Combat Support Hospital, recommended that the applicant be awarded the MSM for exceptionally meritorious service for the period 20 May 1996 to 31 May 1998.  The applicant’s hospital commander recommended approval, as did the commander of the 8th Medical Brigade.  On 19 October 1999 the approval authority, the commander of the 77th Regional Support Command, downgraded the recommendation to the award of the ARCOM. 

In a 26 October 1999 letter, the Inspector General of the 77th informed the applicant that the results of an inquiry showed that the award recommendation was initially returned to the 8th Medical Brigade because it was untimely submitted.  She was further informed that awards could be submitted up to two years after the fact, that the recommendation must be submitted through the chain of command, and that each level in the chain of command could recommend approval, disapproval, or downgrade.  She was told that her recommendation for an award had been retrieved, approved, and would be sent to her.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 3-1 states in pertinent part that the decision to award an individual a decoration and the decision as to which award is appropriate are both subjective decisions made by the commander having award approval authority.  Awards for meritorious achievement or service will not be based upon the grade of the intended recipient.  Rather, the award should reflect both the individual’s level of responsibility and his or her manner of performance.  The degree to which an individual’s achievement or service enhanced the readiness or effectiveness of his or her organization will be the predominant factor.  
That paragraph goes on to say that no individual is automatically entitled to an award upon departure from an assignment.  Awards presented in conjunction with a permanent change of station will be limited to exceptional cases.  Certificates of Achievement and Letters of Commendation or Appreciation are appropriate means to recognize departing personnel.     

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.  The awards approval authority determined that the applicant’s performance merited award of the Army Commendation Medal.  He made a subjective decision and he was in the best position to make that decision.    

2.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of her request.  The Board has been offered no compelling reason to question the decision made by the awards approval authority.   

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement.
  
4.  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

__ewl ___  __kak___  __gjw ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000050089	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2000/12/21	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  46	107.0000	
2.  63	107.0017	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.