MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           16 April 2002     
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002067219

	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	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Ms. Melinda M. Darby		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 his Army Commendation Medal be upgraded to the Meritorious Service Medal.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his final Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Evaluation Report and the statements on the award recommendation do not support the award approval authority’s decision to downgrade the award.  He also contends that there was no explanation given for the decision to downgrade the award.  In support of his application, he submits DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated 3 March 2000; an award certificate for the Army Commendation Medal; NCO Evaluation Report covering the period June 1999 through May 2000; and retirement orders, dated 9 May 2000.

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

The applicant retired in the rank of sergeant first class on 30 June 2000 from the U.S. Army Reserve after completing over 20 years of active duty service in the Active Guard Reserve Program. 

DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated 3 March 2000, shows the applicant was recommended for award of the Meritorious Service Medal for meritorious service for the period 1 June 1999 to 30 June 2000.  The two intermediate authorities recommended approval of the recommendation.  However, the award approval authority disapproved the recommendation for award of the Meritorious Service Medal and downgraded the recommendation to an award of the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service.  The Army Commendation Medal was announced in orders on 16 April 2000.   

In support of his claim, the applicant provided a copy of his NCO Evaluation Report for the period covering June 1999 through May 2000.  This report shows that the applicant’s overall performance was rated as “Successful” and his overall potential for promotion and/or service in positions of greater responsibility was rated as “Superior” by the Senior Rater.  

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Meritorious Service Medal is awarded to a members of the Armed Forces of the United States or of a friendly foreign nation who distinguish themselves by outstanding meritorious achievement or service in a noncombat area.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.  

Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Army Commendation Medal may be awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the Army after 
6 December 1941, distinguished himself or herself by heroism, meritorious achievement or meritorious service.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides in paragraph 3-1c 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.

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.  Evidence of record shows that the applicant’s immediate supervisor at the time in question recommended him for the Meritorious Service Medal for meritorious service for the period 1 June 1999 to 30 June 2000.  Evidence of record also shows that the two intermediate authorities concurred with his recommendation for the Meritorious Service Medal.  However, the award approval authority disapproved the recommendation for the Meritorious Service Medal and downgraded the recommendation to an award of the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service for the period 1 June 1999 to 
30 June 2000.

2.  The applicant has not presented any evidence that the award process or the decision by the appropriate award approval authority for the Army Commendation Medal was flawed or otherwise unjust, improper or inequitable. 

3.  This Board considered all information submitted and all available evidence of record in this case and found no compelling evidence which warranted upgrading the applicant’s award of the Army Commendation Medal to the Meritorious Service Medal.

4.  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 this requirement.

5.  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

INW_____  MMD___  JTM_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002067219	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020416	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0017	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.