IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 September 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150005681 BOARD VOTE: ___x____ ___x____ ___x____ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 September 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150005681 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 showing he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious service for the period 27 October 2004 to 7 December 2005 in lieu of the Meritorious Service Medal. __________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. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 September 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150005681 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 that he be awarded the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) in lieu of the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM). 2. The applicant states: a. He was recommended and approved to receive the BSM by his chain of command for exceptionally meritorious actions in combat during Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). He was also awarded the Combat Action Badge (CAB) for actions taken on several combat missions. b. Unfortunately, during the transition of higher commands, the awards were lost in theater and upon redeployment to the U.S., the awards had to be resubmitted back to Iraq through a different command. In essence, the BSM that was approved by the general officer (Major General (MG) W) in his chain of command and by those who witnessed and were knowledgeable of his combat actions and war time service, was downgraded by the colonel (COL) from the incoming command with whom he never served. c. In an effort to show transparency, he has made several attempts to contact and solicit reconsideration from the personnel who downgraded the award. As well, he informed them of the fact that they were not provided all of the extremely relevant documentation prior to making their decision. This is new and very key information which should have been forwarded for their consideration. As one example, he is aware that they were not informed of his actions taken during several combat-related missions that resulted in him being awarded the CAB. These were just two of the many incidents that occurred. However, this documentation was not provided for their consideration as the unit did not submit it until well after redeployment. d. Additionally, he is including documentation from COL H, 2nd Marine Division Commander at Camp Blue Diamond, Iraq, that provides evidence of exceptionally meritorious acts of leadership and wartime service performed under extreme combat conditions in the Iraq Theater of Operations as he responded to many life threatening incidents. e. He is sure the Board is aware that every incident that happens in a war zone is not noted. As such, every combat incident in which he was exposed or had to respond could not be noted in this letter. However, he trusted his chain of command and they trusted him. Therefore, he asks the members of the Board, considering this BSM, to trust in his chain of command as well. f. He wants the Board to be aware that they were the forces on the ground at the peak of the war in the most high-risk area, Al Anbar Province, conducting very high-threat and life-threatening missions in and out of the wire on a daily basis. Camp Ar Ramadi was one of the, if not the most, dangerous locations in the Al Anbar Province, with constant indirect fire and direct attacks on a daily basis. Despite such life threatening conditions, he proudly served then and he continues to honorably serve this great nation today during Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. g. His chain of command recommended him for the BSM based on their direct knowledge and observance of his exceptionally meritorious acts of service and leadership during combat and under extreme wartime conditions. He humbly asks the Board to trust and support the recommendations of his chain of command (i.e., the leaders on the ground) who felt the BSM was earned and reflective of his combat service in Iraq. h. As noted, the documentation he provides shows evidence of such meritorious acts of achievement that the chain of command noted were well beyond those of his peers and comrades while serving in OlF III. As well, the documentation presented from both his wartime and peacetime chain of command supports this award resubmission and he requests that the original recommendation made by his chain command for the BSM be approved. i. Lastly, he is currently mobilized and again proudly serving our great nation in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. However, he would like to appear before the Board concerning this matter, if necessary. 3. The applicant provides: * DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award) with narrative (unsigned) and citation * orders for the CAB * letter from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) Awards and Decorations Branch, dated 24 August 2012 * memorandum from COL H, Commanding Officer, Headquarters Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, dated 30 September 2005, subject: Calendar Year 2005(CY05) Nomination for Outstanding Platoon Leader Award * memorandum from Brigadier General (BG) W, Commander, 194th Engineer Brigade, dated 6 June 2006, subject: Reconsideration to Award BSM * memorandum from COL M, Assistant Chief of Staff, Support Operations, 310th Expeditionary Sustainment Command, dated 12 July 2006, subject: Reconsideration of Award Recommendation * memorandum from BG K, Commanding General, 84th USAR Readiness Training Command, dated 4 November 2006, subject: Request to Approve BSM * memorandum from Lieutenant General (LTG) S, Commanding General, USAR Command, dated 9 July 2007, subject: Recommendation for Reconsideration of Downgraded BSM CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Following enlisted service in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) and in the Army National Guard, the applicant was appointed a USAR commissioned officer on 23 October 2002 in the rank of second lieutenant, Engineer Branch. He was promoted to first lieutenant effective 22 October 2004. 2. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period 26 October 2004 to 3 January 2006 shows he served in Kuwait/Iraq from 28 December 2004 to 4 December 2005. 3. His Officer Evaluation Report covering the rating period 16 September 2004 through 15 September 2005 describes his significant duties and responsibilities as follows: Vertical Platoon Leader in an Engineer Combat Battalion (Heavy). Responsibilities include; organizing, executing, and evaluating mission essential training, maintenance of assigned equipment, control and proper accountability for all assigned equipment and personnel, meet all pre-mobilization objectives and ensure platoon meets all predeployment deadlines and requirements, and execute all missions assigned by the commander in theater of operations in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom III. Performs additional duties of Public Affairs Officer, Public Relations Officer, Secret Courier Officer, Information Systems Security Management Officer, Information Management Officer, Military Postal Officer and Battalion Historian. 4. Permanent orders show he was awarded the CAB for satisfactory performance of duty while engaged in or being engaged by the enemy on 5 March and 21 September 2005. 5. A DA Form 638 shows he was recommended for the BSM by his company commander for service during the period October 2004 to December 2005. The narrative accompanying the BSM recommendation reads as follows: [Applicant], United States Army, distinguished himself by exceptionally meritorious wartime service to the United States as a Platoon Leader, Bravo Company, 983rd Engineer Battalion and Battalion Historian. 983rd Engineer Battalion, Camp Ar Ramadi, Iraq, from October 27, 2004 to December 7, 2005 during OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM III. During this period, [applicant's] attention to detail, devotion to duty, and determination was instrumental in the success of the 983rd Engineer Battalion's combat mission in the Iraq Theater of Operations. [Applicant] distinguished himself and led by example as a Platoon leader and Battalion Historian. His firm, charismatic, but no nonsense leadership style fostered high expectations that reformed a marginal platoon into the best platoon within Bravo Company. He continuously demanded the best from his Soldiers at all times within the Iraq Theater of Operations (IToO). While in the IToO, [applicant] led from the front as Executive Officer and Officer in Charge and exposed himself to great personal risk lo complete over 70 high risk and critical combat missions that improved the quality of life for thousands of American and Iraqi Forces. His exceptional performance and conduct in a combat zone was essential to mission accomplishment at the platoon thru battalion level. He supervised and participated in level three add-on armor exercises that prepared the 983rd Engineer Battalion's Ground Assault Convoy from Camp Buehring in Kuwait to FOB Speicher in Iraq. His efforts were essential to saving Soldiers lives as the 983rd EN BN did not have up-armored vehicles. Therefore, [applicant] found metal and steel and welded or "hillbilly armored" several vehicles which provided safety and security for over 55 Soldiers. On a critical high threat combat mission, he led a combat patrol on one the most dangerous main service roads in Iraq to a repair an IED hole blown by insurgents on the Samarra Bridge. While on this high threat mission, they received direct gunfire. He directed the security element to secure this extremely dangerous and busy 4 lane highway (packed with slow moving traffic) as they had to repair the hole. Despite receiving direct gunfire, [applicant] and his team worked tirelessly and heroically until the mission was complete. His efforts were paramount to combat operations in the Area of Operations (AO) as it was a major supply route for moving and receiving essential equipment and resources for US and Iraqi forces engaged in the war fight. On another occasion, while on a mission to Camp Ali, insurgents fired a mortar which detonated within 20 meters from [the applicant's] location. Upon receiving enemy indirect fire, he led his team and directed them to push through the attack despite being mentally and physically shaken by the blast. [Applicant] continued to Camp Ali to complete this very high profile and critical mission. For courage and heroic actions under direct and indirect fire, he was awarded the Combat Action Badge. Additionally, he led a high visibility mission that resulted in the construction of four helipads at FOB Speicher for the combat hospital. Under a very short time line, [applicant] completed this mission ahead of schedule. The completion of this project was mission critical as they were the first to be constructed at FOB Speicher for combat operations in the entire AO. These helipads were used immediately to save lives and MEDEVAC Soldiers· suffering from war related injuries in the AO and other lifesaving medical services for soldiers. [Applicant] distinguished himself as a leader. He was in charge of the largest housing project (2.5 million dollars) in the Al Anbar Province. He led the construction and placement of 175 self contained housing units at Camp Blue Diamond, Iraq that improved the quality of life and provided housing accommodations for over 300 Marines (2nd MARDIV) to include the 2nd Marine Division leadership. Despite a demanding timeline and numerous indirect fire attacks, he completed this high-visibility project 6 days ahead of schedule. Furthermore, he shared his leadership and knowledge of engineering with other engineers as he published an article highlighting the accomplishments of this mission in the November-December 2005 issue of the ARMY ENGINEER Magazine. [Applicant] led the force protection efforts al Camp Blue Diamond and surrounding camps. Prior to, there was little force protection against enemy indirect and direct fire. At Camp Blue Diamond alone, [applicant] recognized the situation and placed over 3000 hesco bastions that improved the force protection for thousands of coalition forces against ongoing enemy indirect and direct fire attacks. He led the placement of approximately 10,000 hesco bastions throughout Camp Ar Ramadi and surrounding camps. Also he served as Officer in Charge of a rehabilitation and modification project at Camp Blue Diamond which resulted in construction of a 30' x 45' x 18" concrete wash facility utilized by over 1,300 Marines. He also led the construction of a 122'x 28' x 12" concrete pad used by Marines to house and operate specialized equipment. As well, he poured an additional 35'x 45'x 6" concrete pad which provided over 300 Marines a facility to conduct maintenance operations. Additionally, [applicant] assisted in the completion of the hardened dinning facility that provided protection for thousands of Soldiers at Camp Blue Diamond. Construction of these projects was paramount to combat operations in the AO. Despite a demanding timeline and numerous indirect fire attacks, [applicant] completed these projects ahead of schedule. Additionally, during an enemy indirect fire attack, the billeting area at Camp Blue Diamond was hit and caused a major fire. [Applicant] responded and provided fire suppression support and afterwards worked tirelessly to provide billeting for over 100 displaced Marines. [Applicant] served as Executive Officer and Platoon Leader as he led the rehabilitation and modification project at Camp Defender. His efforts immeasurably improved the health and quality of life for over 350 lraqi Soldiers as he improved the dilapidated and uninhabitable housing conditions and provided sanitary waste systems for Iraqi Soldiers throughout the camp. Working under extremely dangerous conditions and despite numerous indirect fire attacks, he completed the mission ahead of schedule. Additionally, [applicant] led the construction of over 20 Southwest Asia Huts (SWAHUTS) that provided housing and improved quality of life for over 150 American Soldiers at Camp AR Ramadi, Camp Ali, and surrounding camps. [Applicant] led the rehabilitation and modification project al Ogden Gate to prevent further attacks by insurgents against coalition forces. This mission was critical as securing and protecting this location prevented nearby insurgents' access to coalition camp grounds and allowed coalition forces to continue security and combat operations paramount to the force protection of over 3000 American and Iraqi Soldiers at Camp AR Ramadi, Camp Defender, and Camp Ali. Accomplishment of this high profile mission ensured the safety and provided force protection for thousands of American and Iraqi Soldiers. Furthermore, he led the construction of two health facilities in the middle of a "prison" housing many insurgents and Iraqi prisoners at Camp Ar Ramadi. The construction of these facilities was paramount as they were used to provide appropriate health services for American Soldiers and but mainly insurgents and Iraqi prisoners housed within the structure. In the face of working under such extremely dangerous conditions, [applicant] completed this mission ahead of schedule. [Applicant] maintained accountability of all company heavy equipment and sensitive items valued in excess of 5 million dollars. His safety emphasis and focus on maintenance excellence resulted in a 95% equipment readiness rate with zero serious injuries. In the Iraq Theater of Operations, [applicant] voluntarily developed and implemented programs that increased Soldier morale within battalion and enhanced Soldier development. On his own initiative, he organized a battalion wide talent show that increased the morale of over 150 Soldiers. As well, he developed a battalion wide Leaders Forum program that focused on preparing enlisted Soldiers for future positions of military leadership. This program served over 200 Soldiers. Moreover, he encouraged his Soldiers to complete over 500 hours of correspondence courses, as he completed the Captain Career Course Phase I, the Maintenance Leader's Course, and the Small Unit Safety Course. In addition, he successfully defended his Doctoral Proposal toward earning a PHD degree. [Applicant] distinguished himself as the 983rd Engineer Battalion Historian, a position usually held by a major, upon direct appointment by the Battalion Commander. In addition to his stellar performance as a platoon leader, he coordinated and wrote all aspects of the battalion history in the Iraq Theater of Operations. He spent over $1,500 of his own money to purchase needed materials. Furthermore, he sacrificed over countless hours of personal time to write over 100 articles, as well organized over 25,000 photographs he had taken to record the battalion's history. His efforts resulted in a 983rd Engineer Battalion history document worthy of publication. Additionally, he facilitated the seamless transition during the Release in Place (RIP) with the 46th Engineer Battalion, prior to the 983rd Engineer Battalion's redeployment. His sharing of tactical knowledge and survival skills in the AO were critical as it provided current life saving TTPs to the incoming battalion from a ground perspective. Moreover, [applicant] utilized and shared his knowledge to increase the technical proficiency of the 36 Soldiers within his platoon. He trained his platoon on several Warrior Training Tasks that resulted in 100% Soldier validation. As well, his effort and emphasis on training resulted in 25 of 36 Soldiers being Combat Life Saver qualified which was more than any other platoon in the battalion. He implemented, and enforced a rigorous physical fitness program that increased his platoon average from 180 to 240 with 5 Soldiers being awarded the Army Physical Fitness Badge. Furthermore, he conducted additional weapons training with his platoon to ensure maximum proficiency that resulted in 100% Soldier qualification with two Soldiers scoring the highest in the battalion with the M16 and the M249. [Applicant] was selected and endorsed as a candidate for the CY 05 General Douglas MacArthur Award and the CY 05 Outstanding Engineer Platoon Leader Award. [Applicant's] outstanding leadership performance & conduct and his exceptionally meritorious acts of service under extreme combat and wartime conditions in the Iraq Theater of Operations was exemplary. For his exceptionally meritorious acts of service, [applicant] is recommended to receive the Bronze Star Medal. His actions are keeping with the finest traditions of military service and reflect distinct credit upon himself, his command, and the United States Army. 6. The DA Form 638 shows his battalion commander recommend approval of the recommendation for the BSM; however, his brigade commander (COL K) recommended disapproval of the BSM and the downgrade of the BSM to the MSM. 7. On 25 December 2005, the award approval authority disapproved the applicant's recommendation for the BSM and approved the MSM. 8. Based on an HRC letter dated 24 August 2012, it appears the applicant submitted an appeal to HRC in 2008 requesting the upgrade of his MSM to the BSM. 9. The applicant's record shows he submitted a second request to HRC, through his Representative in Congress, requesting to be awarded the BSM in lieu of the MSM. By letter dated 24 August 2012, HRC Awards and Decorations Branch responded to his Representative in Congress and stated that they were unable to process the applicant's request. The Army Decorations Board determined on 28 August 2008 that the degree of action and service rendered did not meet the criteria for the proposed award. The Commanding General, HRC, acting on behalf of the Secretary of the Army, affirmed that the previously awarded MSM was the appropriate award for the applicant's service and achievements. Per Department of Defense and Army policy, one-time reconsideration of a previously approved award shall be conclusive. 10. The applicant provided: a. Memorandum from the Commanding Officer, Headquarters Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, dated 30 September 2005, subject: CY05 Nomination for Outstanding Platoon Leader Award, recommending the applicant for the CY05 Outstanding Platoon Leader Award based on the applicant's outstanding performance of duty while serving as platoon and project officer in charge of a 116-unit life support project in support of Headquarters Battalion, 2nd Marine Division during OIF. b. Memorandum from BG W, Commander, 194th Engineer Brigade, dated 6 June 2006, subject: Reconsideration to Award BSM, in which BG W recommended the approval of the BSM originally submitted for the applicant based on his exceptionally meritorious service during OIF III. BG W also based his recommendation on the fact that the applicant's chain of command had recommended approval of the BSM, but unfortunately, the BSM recommendation was misplaced and had to be resubmitted through a different chain of command. c. Memorandum from COL M, Assistant Chief of Staff, Support Operations, 310th Expeditionary Sustainment Command, dated 12 July 2006, subject: Reconsideration of Award Recommendation, recommending the approval of the BSM for the applicant based on his exceptionally meritorious service during OIF III and because the recommendation had been approved by his chain of command before it was misplaced. d. Memorandum from BG K, Commanding General, USAR Readiness Training Command, dated 4 November 2006, subject: Request to Approve BSM. BG K stated the following: (1) After reviewing the documentation along with the DA Form 638, he believes the applicant's meritorious service should be appropriately recognized by awarding him the BSM as originally recommended. (2) In many cases, the contributions and actions of USAR Soldiers receive lesser recognition by our active components, especially when cross-leveled and no parent unit advocates for the Soldier. However, the applicant was exposed to the same dangers present in the combat zone as our active branches and responded heroically under enemy combat eas evidenced by him being awarded the CAB. e. Memorandum from LTG S, Commanding General, USAR Command, dated 9 July 2007, subject: Recommendation for Reconsideration of Downgraded BSM. LTG S stated the following: (1) Upon review of the award recommendation and supporting documents. He strongly recommends approval of the original recommendation for the BSM to be awarded to the applicant. (2) The original award was downgraded to the MSM by the Commander, Multinational Corps-Iraq. However, the justification and details provided by his chain of command warrant reconsideration. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states: a. The MSM is awarded to any servicemember of the Armed Forces of the United States who has distinguished himself or herself by outstanding meritorious achievement or service. After 16 January 1969 but prior to 11 September 2001, the MSM is authorized to be awarded only for meritorious service or achievement while serving in a noncombat area. Effective 11 September 2001 to a date to be determined, the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1 granted an exception to policy to award the MSM in a combat theater for noncombat meritorious achievement and service for the Global War on Terrorism era. This exception does not authorize the MSM to be used as an upgrade or downgrade to or from a recommended BSM. b. The BSM is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity in or with the Armed Forces of the United States after 6 December 1941, distinguished himself or herself by heroic or meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight, in connection with military operations against an armed enemy; or while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1133 limits award of the BSM to Servicemembers receiving imminent danger pay. c. A request for reconsideration or the appeal of a disapproved or downgraded award, or a request for an upgrade of a previously approved recommendation, must be placed in official channels within 1 year from the date of the awarding authority’s decision. A one-time reconsideration by the award approval authority will be conclusive. However, pursuant to Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1130, a Member of Congress may request a review of a proposal for the award or presentation of a decoration (or the upgrading of a decoration) that is not authorized to be presented or awarded due to time limitations established by law or policy. Recommendations are submitted for reconsideration or appeal only if new, substantive, and material information is furnished and the time limits do not prevent such action. Once HRC or the award approval authority has made a decision on the award reconsideration or appeal, other options for reconsideration or appeal include the ABCMR and the Inspector General. Awards that are approved and presented for meritorious service will not be considered for an upgrade to a valorous award. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant requests that his MSM be upgraded to the BSM. 2. The evidence shows the applicant was recommended for the BSM by his immediate commander for his exceptionally meritorious service in support of OIF; however, the recommendation was disapproved by the award approval authority and he was awarded the MSM instead. 3. The evidence further shows the applicant requested reconsideration of the BSM denial to HRC through his Representative in Congress. However, HRC denied the request for reconsideration and stated that the Army Decorations Board determined on 28 August 2008 that the degree of action and service rendered did not meet the criteria for the proposed award. HRC further stated that the HRC Commanding General, acting on behalf of the Secretary of the Army, affirmed that the previously awarded MSM was the appropriate award for the applicant' service and achievements. 4. Based on the dates of the documents provided by the applicant, it is presumed that the Army Decorations Board and the HRC Commanding General examined the same documentation he is providing to the ABCMR in their adjudication of his request for the BSM in lieu of the MSM. 4. The recommendations as presented in the memoranda provided were carefully considered; however, the awards regulation provides that requests for reconsideration or the appeal of a disapproved or downgraded award are submitted for reconsideration or appeal only if new, substantive, and material information is furnished. There appears to be no such new evidence with this request. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150005681 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150005681 12 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2