MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            23 March 2000 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999030344

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger Able		Member	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		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:  In effect, that he receive a Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) and that it be added to his records.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was awarded the MSM when he retired and it was not added to the DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) issued him at retirement.

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

He continuously served on active duty from 23 October 1975 to 31 October 1995, at which time he was honorably separated from active duty, by reason of length of service retirement, in the rank of sergeant first class/E-7.

Block 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) and its continuation in block 18 (Remarks) of the DD Form 214 show that the applicant received the following awards during his tenure on active duty:  two Army Commendation Medals; three Army Achievement Medals; six Good Conduct Medals; the National Defense Service Medal; the Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon with numeral 3; the Army Service Ribbon; three Overseas Service Ribbons; the Sharpshooter Rifle Qualification Badge; the Grenade Sharpshooter Qualification Badge; and the Driver and Mechanic Badge with a Driver-W Bar.  The DD Form 214 does not show that the applicant earned the MSM.

The applicant’s Department of the Army Form 2-1 (Qualification Record) does not include the MSM in block 9 (Awards, Decorations & Campaigns) nor does the Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) include any documentation that shows the applicant was either recommended for or awarded the MSM.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 1-14 (Time Limitations) states, in pertinent part, that each recommendation for an award of a military decoration must be entered administratively into military channels within 2 years of the act, achievement, or service to be honored.  It also states that no military decoration, except the Purple Heart, will be awarded more than 3 years after the act or period of service to be honored. 

Paragraph 1-15 (Lost Recommendations) indicates that if the Secretary of the Army determines that a statement setting forth the distinguished act, achievement, or service, and a recommendation for official recognition was made and supported by sufficient evidence within 2 years after the distinguished service, and that no award was made because the statement was lost, or through inadvertence the recommendation was not acted upon; he or she may, within 
2 years after the date of the determination, award any appropriate military decoration.  However, this requires conclusive evidence of the formal submission of the recommendation into military channels and conclusive evidence of the loss of the recommendation or the failure to act on the recommendation through inadvertence. 

Paragraph 3-14 provides the guidelines for awarding the MSM.  It states that the MSM Medal is awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States or to any member of the Armed Forces of a friendly foreign nation who, while serving in a noncombat area after 16 January 1969, has distinguished himself or herself by outstanding meritorious achievement or service.  

Paragraph 3-18 provides the rules for processing the DA Form 638 (Award Recommendation), which is required to initiate, process, and approve award recommendations of all U.S. Army individual decorations, to include valor and heroism decorations.  Table 3-3 (Delegation of Award Approval Authority-Wartime Conditions) indicates that an officer serving in the rank of major general is authorized to approve the award of the MSM.  

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.  Notwithstanding the contention of the applicant, the Board found no evidentiary basis to conclude that he was actually recommended for the MSM, that this award was approved by the appropriate authority, or that the award was authorized in published orders, which are all elements required by regulation in order to authorize a member the MSM.  

2.  The US Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically award the MSM for service to every member who retires for length of service.  By regulation, a member must be recommended for the award, and each award is approved by the appropriate authority based on the merits of each individual recommendation. There is no evidence of record to show that the applicant was ever recommended for the MSM.  

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 the aforementioned 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

__slp___  __jea____  ___ra ___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030344	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/03/23	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	N/A	
DISCHARGE REASON	N/A	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 63	107.0017	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.