| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Ms. June Hajjar | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That she be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal.
APPLICANT STATES: That she should have received the Army Good Conduct Medal after her third year of service.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
She enlisted in the Army on 14 May 1997.
On 4 May 1999, the applicant was counseled concerning her failure to pass the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). She was flagged effective 4 May 1999.
On 25 August 1999, the applicant failed her second consecutive APFT and it was recommended she receive a local bar to reenlistment. The bar was approved on 24 September 1999.
On 6 November 2000, the applicant’s commander initiated separation proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 for unsatisfactory performance. His recommendation cited her four consecutive failures of the APFT as the basis for the action.
On 8 December 2000, the applicant was discharged, with an honorable discharge, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-2F, physical standards.
Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards. It provides that the Army 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 normally 3 years. Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.
Army Regulation 600-8-2 prescribes policies governing the suspension of favorable personnel actions (flagging actions). In pertinent part, it states that failure to pass the APFT requires a flagging action. A flag prohibits the execution of awards and decorations.
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. 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.
2. The applicant would have become eligible for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal on 13 May 2000; however, she was flagged effective 4 May 1999. It appears her flag was never lifted and a flagging action prohibits award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.
3. 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
__jh____ __mhm___ __ejl___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001051692 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010801 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 107.0056 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001066112C070421
APPLICANT STATES : That she received a profile to take an alternate Army physical fitness test (APFT) and her command refused to give it to her. The applicant failed her first APFT in May 2000 and it appears she failed one or two other, non-record APFTs before a second record APFT failure in September 2000. She provides no evidence to show that she sought medical attention to discover if her thyroid condition or any medical condition could have been the reason for her APFT failures.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130010363
The applicant requests a memorandum, dated 9 February 1999, for disqualification of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) and related files be removed from her Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) (formerly known as the Official Military Personnel File). The applicant provides: * Disqualification memorandum, dated 9 February 1999, and related document * Permanent Orders 151-00024, dated 30 May 2000, for the first award of the AGCM * ERB CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. She provides a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014287
Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) governs the evaluation of physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform his or her duties and assign an appropriate disability rating before that service member can be medically separated or retired. The evidence of record confirms the applicant did not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059470C070421
The applicant provided DA Form 705 (Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard), dated 22 April 1999, which shows that she passed the APFT and her height was recorded as 69 inches and her weight was recorded as 214 pounds. However, evidence of record shows that the applicant failed to take the APFT for two consecutive years due to a medical profile (May 1996 to April 1997; and May 1997 to April 1998). After review of all evidence in this case, the Board determined that the applicant has not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013460
A USAHRC-STL memorandum, dated 13 April 2005, shows that the applicant was selected for promotion to 1LT by an Administrative Promotion Board that convened on 31 March 2005. USAHRC-STL Orders B-05-501580, dated 9 May 2005, show that the applicant was promoted to 1LT effective 18 April 2005, with a date of rank of 18 April 2005. Based on her date of rank of 18 April 2005 and completion of 5 years time in the lower grade, the applicant's promotion eligibility date (PED) for CPT is 17 April 2010.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072707C070403
PERSCOM officials indicate that the applicant was conditionally promoted on 14 October 1999, and that this promotion was later revoked based on his failure to attend a scheduled ANCOC class due to a FLAG action based on his failure of a record APFT. The Army’s ANCOC general attendance policy outlined by the PERSCOM NCOES branch states, in pertinent part, that is currently no deadline in determining when the soldier must attend ANCOC. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015492
She could not pass the APFT and never had. In order to be eligible for promotion to SGT, a Soldier must have a passing APFT score among other requirements and any previously-initiated flag must have been lifted from his or her record. ____________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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014822
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003084C070205
She maintains that the DD Form 2173, (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status) verified her injury; however, no one in the command took the time to correct the narrative summary listed on her DD Form 214. As a result, she was separated from the Army for failure to pass the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). The service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions as warranted by their military records.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040005173C070208
Patrick H. McGann | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests that her Officer Evaluation Report (OER) for the period 1 December 1999 through 25 May 2000 be amended to show it was not referred; to remove the referral attachments to the OER from her records; and, in Part Vb that the sentences, "1LT ___ failed to take the APFT, administered twice during the rating period (1 Apr & 6 May). The 77th...