IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 26 January 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090014456 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, award of the Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for his period of Regular Army (RA) service. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that his official records contain a memorandum disqualifying him from receiving the Good Conduct Medal (1st award) due to receiving nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for violating a local policy. He had a female stay in his barracks room at Fort Sill, OK. He also states that this local policy was rescinded 3 months after he received the NJP. He adds that this is the only incident he has been involved in during 17 years of service to date. Further, he states that he does not believe the NJP is sufficient grounds for denying him award of the Good Conduct Medal. 3. The applicant provides a copy of the Good Conduct Medal disqualification memorandum, dated 28 April 1994, in support of his request. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant is a sergeant first class in the U.S. Army Reserve, currently assigned to the U.S. Army Reserve Command, Orlando, FL, as a senior health readiness noncommissioned officer. 2. The applicant's records show he initially enlisted in the RA for a period of 2 years and 22 weeks on 21 January 1992. He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 91B (Medical Specialist). He was subsequently assigned to Headquarters and Service Company, U.S. Army Medical Department Activity (MEDDAC), Fort Sill, OK. 3. On 28 April 1994, shortly before the applicant was separated, his immediate commander initiated a memorandum disqualifying him from receiving the Good Conduct Medal (1st award) for the period from 21 January 1992 through 24 June 1994. The immediate commander cited the reason as the UCMJ action taken against the applicant on 30 December 1993. The memorandum indicates the applicant was asked to acknowledge he understood that he was not receiving the Good Conduct Medal, but he refused to sign the memorandum and placed his initials next to the statement "Soldier refused to sign." 4. He was released from active duty on 23 June 1994 under what appears to be the provisions of chapter 4 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of completion of required active service. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he completed 2 years, 5 months, and 3 days of creditable active service. Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of this form shows he was awarded the Army Service Ribbon, the National Defense Service Medal, and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar. 5. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service. This period is 3 years 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 AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that he should have received the Good Conduct Medal for his first period of active service. 2. The evidence of record shows that shortly before his release from active duty, the applicant's immediate commander initiated a memorandum disqualifying the applicant from receiving the Good Conduct Medal (1st award) citing his UCMJ action as the basis for the denial. The facts and circumstances surrounding the UCMJ action are not available for review with this case. However, regardless of whether the local policy was rescinded at a later date or not, the fact remains that the local policy was in effect at the time, the applicant violated it and received UCMJ action for his offense. Accordingly, his immediate commander, the award approval authority, disqualified him for the Good Conduct Medal (1st award). There is neither an error nor an injustice. 3. The applicant's subsequent/current service was considered. However, in order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant did not submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement. Therefore, he is not entitled to relief. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____X___ ____X__ ____X___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _______ _ _X______ ___ CHAIRPERSON 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. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090014456 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090014456 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1