MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            24 October 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002072033

	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. Beverly A. Young		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		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:  Correction of his records to show he completed the Combat Lifesaver Course in January 1998 and to show he was awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for service in Bosnia from February 1998 to September 1998, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Medal and the Good Conduct Medal.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) is in error because it does not show these items.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of his DD Form 214.

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

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 June 1997 in the rank of private PV2 for a period of four years.  He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and was assigned to Fort Hood, Texas, as a signal support systems specialist.  The applicant was honorably released from active duty on 8 June 2001 in the rank of private PV1.

The applicant's DD Form 214 does not show the Combat Lifesaver Course in item 14 (Military Education).  

There is no evidence available to the Board which shows the applicant completed the Combat Lifesaver Course.  His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) does not list this course in item 17 (Civilian Education and Military Schools).

The applicant's DD Form 214 does not show that he served in Bosnia.  Also, his discharge document does not show the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal or the NATO Medal as authorized awards.

There is no indication in the applicant's records which shows he served in Bosnia.  Item 5 (Oversea Service) on his DA Form 2-1 does not show he was deployed in Bosnia.

There is no evidence of record which shows that he was awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and the NATO Medal for service in Bosnia.  His DA Form 2-1 does not list these awards in item 9 (Awards, Decorations and Campaigns).

There is no evidence the applicant received the first award of the Good Conduct Medal.  His records do not show that he was recommended for the Good Conduct Medal by his chain of command.

The applicant's DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document) shows he enlisted in the Regular Army in pay grade E-2.  His discharge document shows he was released from active duty in the rank of private/pay grade E-1 with an effective date of pay grade of 26 October 2000.  This reduction from pay grade E-2 to pay grade E-1 may have been a disqualifying factor for award of the Good Conduct Medal.  

Army Regulation 635-5 establishes the policies and procedures for 
completion and distribution of the DD Form 214.  In pertinent part it states that item 14 (military education) will list formal in service training courses of 40 hours or more successfully completed during the period of service covered by title, length in weeks, and month and year completed.  This information is to assist the soldier after separation in job placement and counseling; therefore, training courses for combat skills are not listed.

MILPER Message Number 99-157 announced the extension of Section 572, National Defense Authorization Act, FY98, November 1997, to allow award of either the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM) or the Armed Forces Service Medal (AFSM) to service members participating in Operation Joint Forge effective 21 June 1998 to a date to be determined.  Award of the AFEM is limited to only those participants in or providing direct support to Operation Joint Forge who are or were deployed in the countries of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia, aboard US Naval Vessels operating in the Adriatic Sea, and their respective air space.  Award of the AFSM is limited to only those participants in or providing direct support to Operation Joint Forge who are or were deployed in Slovenia, Montenegro, Macedonia, Serbia, and Hungary; and their respective air space.  Unlike the AFEM and AFSM authorized for Operation Joint Endeavor and Operation Joint Guard, no service member will be awarded both the AFEM and the AFSM for participation or direct support of Operation Joint Forge, under any circumstance.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Medal was authorized by the Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization for specific NATO operations.  The Secretary of Defense may approve acceptance and wear by United States service members who meet the criteria specified by the Secretary General of NATO.  Acceptance of the NATO Medal has been approved for U.S. military personnel who serve under NATO command or operational control in direct support of NATO operations in the former Republic of Yugoslavia from 1 July 1992 through a date to be determined.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity 

except in those cases when the period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military service.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.  

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 Board considered the applicant's request for correction of his records to show he completed the Combat Lifesaver Course in January 1998.  

2.  There is no evidence of record which shows he completed the Combat Lifesaver Course.  Therefore, there is no basis for correcting his DD Form 214 to show this course.

3.  The Board also considered the applicant's request for award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for service in Bosnia from February 1998 to September 1998 and the NATO Medal.  

4.  There is no evidence of record and the applicant has provided no evidence which shows that he was deployed in Bosnia or that he was awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and the NATO Medal.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and the NATO Medal in this case.

5.  There is no evidence available to the Board which shows the applicant was recommended by his chain of command for award of the Good Conduct Medal.  

6.  Evidence of record shows the applicant was reduced from private PV2  to private PV1 effective 26 October 2000 which may have resulted in his disqualification for award of the Good Conduct Medal.  As a result, the Board has determined that, in the absence of a recommendation by the chain of command for award of the Good Conduct Medal, there is no basis for awarding the Good Conduct Medal in this case.

7.  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.

8.  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

RVO______  BJE_____  KAH_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002072033	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20021024	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Mr. Chun	
ISSUES         1.	107.0000	
2.	100.0000	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.