Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018293
Original file (20100018293.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  12 October 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100018293 


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 removal of the Disqualification Statement for Award of Good Conduct Medal from his official military personnel file (OMPF).

2.  The applicant states this document was not prepared in its entirety and was never approved by his higher command.  He contends he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) (2nd Award) by his higher headquarters on 6 April 1996 for the period prescribed in the orders.

3.  He claims he was never presented the disqualification statement or given the opportunity to respond.  He makes reference to Army Regulation 600-37 (Unfavorable Information) which states the Soldier must be presented with an opportunity to respond and if the Soldier refuses to sign, it must be noted in block 3 of the disqualification statement.

4.  He requests the document be removed from his OMPF on the grounds that he has faithfully and honorably served in the U.S. Army for 20 years and has had an outstanding career.  A document of this type, which was filed in his records so long ago, could affect his credibility.

5.  The applicant provides a copy of Bravo Detachment, 18th Personnel Service Battalion, Permanent Orders 000097-007, dated 6 April 1996, and a copy of the Disqualification Statement for Award of Good Conduct Medal, dated 6 March 1996.



CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  On 8 June 1990, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years.  He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 31M (Multichannel Communication System Operator).  His records show he served several tours on active duty and in the U.S. Army Reserve.  He is currently serving on active duty in an Active Guard Reserve status as a company first sergeant/E-8 with a signal battalion.

2.  Permanent Orders 000097-007, published by Bravo Detachment, 18th Personnel Service Battalion, awarded the applicant the second award of the AGCM for the period of service from 8 June 1993 through 7 June 1996.  This order is filed in the applicant's OMPF.

3.  Contained in the performance portion of the applicant's OMPF is a copy of the Disqualification Statement for Award of Good Conduct Medal, dated 20 March 1996.  Page 1 of this form required the applicant's signature and acknowledgement.  This page only contains the company commander's signature and the entry "Soldier unavailable for signature."  Page 2 of this document contains the following, "__X__ I have reviewed the statement or documents submitted on _____.  Disqualification stands.  File this correspondence in accordance with Army Regulation 640-10 (Individual Military Personnel Records)."  Only the commander signed this page of the document.  Page 3 of the document contains the commander's rationale for disqualification of the award.  It contains the statement, "I have disqualified Specialist G____, 2XX-XX-XXXX, for the following reason(s):  Received summarized Article 15 for disrespect."

4.  The applicant's record contains Permanent Orders W-10-572403, dated 25 October 2005, which awarded him the Army Good Conduct Medal (3rd Award) for the period 6 October 2002 through 5 October 2005.

5.  His record contains Permanent Orders W-10-88227, dated 25 October 2008, which awarded him the Army Good Conduct Medal (4th Award) for the period 6 October 2005 through 5 October 2008.

6.  The applicant's records are void of any nonjudicial punishment or documentation pertaining to any acts of indiscipline or reprimand.

7.  A copy of a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated 11 October 2006, shows the applicant was recommended for award of the Bronze Star Medal for his meritorious and distinguished service in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom 05-07.  His record shows he was issued a Meritorious Service Medal as the approved award.

8.  Copies of the applicant's DA Form 2166-8 (Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reports) consistently show he exceeded the standard as evidenced by his ratings of "excellence" throughout his military career.

9.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Military Awards), in effect at that time, provides that for each instance in which disqualification for award of the AGCM is determined by the unit commander, he or she will prepare a statement of rationale for the decision.  The statement will include the period of disqualification and will be referred to the individual in accordance with Army Regulation 600-37, paragraph 3-6.  The commander will consider the affected individual's statement and if the commander's decision remains the same, he/she will forward disqualification statement, the individual's statement, and his/her (commander's) consideration for filing in the Soldier's record.

10.  Army Regulation 600-37 states that unfavorable information will not be filed in an official personnel file unless the recipient has been given the chance to review the documentation that serves as the basis for the proposed filing and make a written statement or to decline, in writing, to make such a statement.

11.  Army Regulation 600-37 also states that once an official document has been properly filed in the OMPF, it is presumed to be administratively correct and to have been filed pursuant to an objective decision by competent authority.  Therefore, the burden of proof rests with the individual concerned to provide evidence of a clear and convincing nature that the document is untrue or unjust, in whole or in part, thereby warranting its alteration or removal from the OMPF.

12. Army Regulation 640-10, in effect at the time, controlled the filing of documents in military personnel records.  It authorized the filing of the Disqualification Statement for Award of Good Conduct Medal on the performance portion the OMPF in the commendatory and disciplinary section.

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 is the current regulation that controls the filing of documents in military personnel records.  It states that once placed in the OMPF, the document becomes a permanent part of that file.  The document will not be removed from a fiche or moved to another part of the fiche unless directed by one of several agencies, including this Board.  It does note that the custodian of the OMPF may remove documents in the OMPF only when the documents have been improperly filed.

14.  The Wikipedia website explains procedural due process in the United States as one which is generally governed by explicit guarantees of procedural rights under the Bill of Rights.  Most of these rights have been incorporated under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.  Among those rights is the constitutional right to procedural due process, which has been broadly construed to protect the individual so that statutes, regulations, and enforcement actions must ensure that no one is deprived of life, liberty, or property without a fair opportunity to affect the judgment or result.  At a basic level, it is essentially based on the concept of fundamental fairness.  As construed by the courts, it includes an individual's right to be adequately notified of charges or proceedings, the opportunity to be heard at these proceedings, and that the person or panel making the final decision over the proceedings be impartial in regards to the matter before them.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request to remove the Disqualification Statement for Award of Good Conduct Medal from his OMPF was carefully considered and was found to have merit.

2.  Regulatory guidelines state that unfavorable information will not be filed in an official personnel file unless the recipient has been given the chance to review the documentation and makes a written statement or declines, in writing, to make such a statement.  The document in question appears to have been incomplete and not prepared within the regulatory guidelines of Army Regulation 672-5-1.

3.  His records contain no nonjudicial punishment or reprimands.  It does show he was awarded the AGCM (1st Award) for the same period in which the disqualification statement was filed.  It is unclear why the applicant was unavailable for signature or if he was, in fact, afforded the opportunity to make a statement prior to the filing of this document.  Unfortunately, this document was filed in the applicant's OMPF without his acknowledgement.

4.  Although no regulatory violation exists in filing this type of document in the OMPF, it does appear that a violation of procedural due process occurred during the preparation and the implementation phases.  As such, in the interest of equity and justice, it would be appropriate to expunge the Disqualification Statement for Award of Good Conduct Medal, dated 20 March 1996, from the applicant's OMPF.



BOARD VOTE:

___X____  ___X____  ___X____  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by expunging the Disqualification Statement for Award of Good Conduct Medal, dated 20 March 1996, from his OMPF.



      __________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)                                         AR20100018293



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100018293



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050009232C070206

    Original file (20050009232C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides: a. The applicant’s request to have a memorandum, dated 19 November 1996 pertaining to denial of award to the AGCM removed from his records was carefully considered. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by removing Department of the Army, 2nd Battalion, 14th Infantry, Fort Drum, New York, memorandum dated 19 November 1996 and titled Denial of Good Conduct Medal, be removed from the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150004532

    Original file (20150004532.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning military awards and decorations. The applicant contends his request for removal of the AGCM disqualification documents that are filed in his OMPF should be reconsidered because he was not notified of or given the opportunity to respond to the commander's proposed disqualification action and he subsequently received the AGCM for the cited period of service. The evidence of record...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007230

    Original file (20120007230.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests the memorandum denying him award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) or placed in the restricted portion of his OMPF. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that for each instance in which disqualification for award of the AGCM is determined by the unit commander, he or she will prepare a statement of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087463C070212

    Original file (2003087463C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT STATES : That there are orders in his OMPF awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (Fifth Award), dated 8 April 1999. In a 6 April 1998 memorandum from the commander of HHC, 27th Engineer Battalion at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, the applicant was informed of the commander's intention to disqualify him for award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period October 1994 to October 1997. The evidence of record shows the applicant completed qualifying service of three years for award of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029077

    Original file (20100029077.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence showing he was awarded the 4th award of the AGCM. Therefore, it would be appropriate to award him the AGCM (4th Award) for the period 10 January 1998 through 9 January 2001 and to correct his DD Form 214 to show this award. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. deleting from item 13 of his DD Form 214 the Army Good Conduct Medal (3rd Award); b. awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150000213

    Original file (20150000213.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states his OMPF contains a disqualification statement for award of the AGCM, dated 19 November 1997; however, he was awarded the AGCM for the period 25 July 1996 to 24 July 1999 on 4 February 2000, so he doesn't understand why the memorandum is still in his records. His OMPF contains this disqualification memorandum. Absent any evidence of error or injustice in the AGCM disqualification process, there is not a sufficiently compelling reason to remove the AGCM disqualification...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150000030

    Original file (20150000030.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    His OMPF contains the following orders that awarded him the AGCM, listed chronologically by order date: * Headquarters, NTC and Fort Irwin Permanent Orders 90-46, dated 26 August 1993 (AGCM 1st Award, for the period 11 July 1990 to 10 July 1993) * Headquarters, NTC and Fort Irwin Permanent Orders 31-60, dated 4 April 1994 (AGCM 1st Award, for the period 11 July 1990 to 10 July 1993) * Detachment A, 90th Personnel Service Battalion (PSB) Permanent Orders 131-12, dated 4 November 1996 (AGCM...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070016983

    Original file (20070016983.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant continues that a memorandum for the disqualification of the first award for the Army Good Conduct Medal was erroneously filed in his MPRJ (Military Personnel Jacket Record) and in the performance section of his OMPF. The applicant contends that the memorandum of disqualification, dated 9 February 2001, for the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, filed in the performance portion of his OMPF should be removed. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090018178

    Original file (20090018178.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, that the orders awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM), 3rd Award, for the period September 2004 through September 2007 be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The applicant's OMPF contains a copy of a memorandum from the 233rd Transportation Company, Fort Knox, KY, Subject: Disqualification of the AGCM to [the applicant's name], dated 6 July 2007 which shows his commander disqualified him for award of the AGCM during the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001490

    Original file (20090001490.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Headquarters, 502d Personnel Service Battalion, Permanent Order 261-28, dated 18 September 2002, shows the applicant received the first award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 1 September 1999 through 31 August 2001. Absent any disqualifying factors for award of the Good Conduct Medal, it appears the orders for the applicant's second award of the Good Conduct Medal were revoked because the dates of qualifying service were incorrect (not continuous). However, if the applicant can...