APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show entitlement the Good Conduct Medal (GCM), the Multinational Force and Observers Medal (MFO) and that item 16 on his DD Form 214, be corrected to read yes for high school graduate or general equivalent diploma (GED). APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that the above items needs to be corrected, so that he can enter the corrected items on his resume. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: The applicant was born on 28 May 1962. He completed 10 years of formal education. On 1 November 1979, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. His Armed Forces Qualification Test score was 63 (Category III). He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11B10 (Infantryman). The highest grade achieved was pay grade E-4. On 30 December 1981, while assigned to a unit at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for disobeying a lawful order. His imposed punishment was a reduction to pay grade E-3 (suspended for 90 days), 14 days restriction and extra duty. On 5 July 1982, while assigned as a member of the Multinational Force and Observer, in the Republic of Egypt, the applicant accepted an NJP under Article 15, UCMJ, for falsifying a legal document and for failure to repair. His imposed punishment was a reduction to pay grade E-3 (suspended for 90 days), 14 days extra duty and 7 days restriction. On 29 October 1982, he was honorably discharged from service, in pay grade E-4, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, (Expiration Term of Service). His DD Form 214, indicated that he had completed 2 years, 11 months and 29 days of creditable active service. He was authorized the Humanitarian Service Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the Expert Infantry Badge, the Parachutist Badge, the Expert Badge M-16 and the Expert Badge Hand Grenade. Army Regulation 600-8-22 indicates, in pertinent part, that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded on a selective basis to each soldier who distinguished himself from among his fellow soldiers by his exemplary conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a specified period of continuous enlisted active Federal military service. Army Regulation 600-8-22, provides for an award of the Multinational Forces and Observers Medal, established by the Director General of the MFO. The MFO awards are made by the Director General, or by officials to whom the Director General delegates awarding authority. To qualify for the award, personnel must have served with the MFO at least 90 cumulative days after 3 August 1981. Effective 15 March 1985, personnel must served 6 months (170 days minimum with the MFO to qualify for the award. Periods of service on behalf of the MFO outside of the Sinai, and periods of leave while a member is serving with the MFO, may be counted toward eligibility for the MFO medal. (Qualifying time may be lost for disciplinary reason). DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded: 1. 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 2. There is no evidence of record nor has the applicant submitted any documentary evidence that he was recommended for or awarded GCM. However, in view of the applicant receiving two NJP’s it is unlikely that his commander recommended him for the award of the GCM. 3. The applicant did not serve the required 170 days minimum with a MFO unit for the award of the MFO Medal. 4. The applicant’s record clearly shows that when he enlisted into the Regular Army he had only completed 10 years of formal education. There is no evidence in the applicant’s record to indicate that he attained a high school GED before he was discharged from service. The applicant submitted a document which indicated that he obtained a GED on 18 March 1983, However; this diploma was obtained after he was discharged from service. 5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s requests. 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 DENY APPLICATION Karl F. Schneider Acting Director