ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	BOARD DATE:  18 October 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20170007717


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  the Army Achievement Medal (AAM) (4th award) or amend 
the award to the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) (2nd award) and AAM (3rd 
award).  He would also like to be considered for promotion to Staff Sergeant (SSG).

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	DA Form 2166-8 (NCO Evaluation Report (NCOER)), for the period 10 July 2012   
through 9 July 2013
*	DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated 5 September 2013

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United 
States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of 
Military Records conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 

2.  The applicant states his DD Form 214 should be corrected to reflect the proper 
amount of awards.

	a.  He should have been awarded the AAM (4th award) or amend the award to the 
ARCOM (2nd award) and AAM (3rd award).  

	b.  He believes he should have been promoted to SSG prior to being medically 
retired as recommended by his last NCOER.  His last NCOER shows he should have 
been promoted.  

3.  The applicant provided:

	a.  DA Form 2166-8, for the period 10 July 2012 to 9 July 2013.  Part V (Overall 
Performance and Potential), block e (Senior Rater Bullet Comments), his senior rated 
commented he should be “promoted to SSG with his peers.”

	b.  DA Form 638, dated 5 September 2013, shows he was recommended for the 
ARCOM (1 Oak Leaf Cluster (OLC)).  Part IV Recommendations/Approval/Disapproval), 
item 23 (Intermediate Authority), block d (Recommend), the intermediate authority 
recommended the award be downgraded to an AAM.  Item 26d shows the approval 
authority approved the award and ordered an AAM (3rd Oak Leaf Cluster) be issued 
through Permanent Order (PO) number 
248-001.

4.  The applicant’s service record shows:

	a.  On 6 February 2001, he enlisted in the Regular Army.  

	b.  He served in Korea from 23 September 2001 through 22 April 2003.

	c.  On 5 February 2005, he was honorably released from active duty for completion 
of required active service.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from 
Active Duty) reflects he completed 4 years of active service.  It also shows that he was 
awarded or authorized the ARCOM and the AAM (2nd award) among other awards.  

	d.  On 16 May 2008, he enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve.  

	e.  From 9 January 2012 to 7 December 2012, he served on active duty.  

	f.  He received an AAM for the period covering 1 February 2001 to 3 October 2013  
It was issued under Permanent Orders (PO) Number 248-001.  

	g.  On 30 October 2013, he was honorably retired by reason of permanent disability, 
in the rank/grade of sergeant/E-5.  His DD Form 214 reflects he completed 7 years, 7 
months, and 20 days of active service.  It also shows that he was awarded or was 
authorized the ARCOM and the AAM (2nd award) among other decorations, medals, 
badges, citations, and campaign ribbons.  

	h.  His records does not contain promotion orders nor orders announcing the award 
of the ARCOM in addition to what is currently shown on his DD Form 214.  

5.  By regulation (600-8-22) the AAM is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of 
the United States, who while serving in a noncombat area distinguished themselves by 
meritorious service or achievement.  As with all personal decorations, formal 
recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in 
orders are required.

6.  By regulation (AR 600-8-22), the Army Commendation Medal may be awarded to 
any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any 
capacity with the Army distinguishes himself or herself by heroism, meritorious 
achievement, or meritorious service.  As with all personal decorations, formal 
recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in 
orders are required.

7.  By regulation (635-5) the senior rater is primarily responsible for evaluating the 
NCO’s potential and providing oversight of the evaluation process.  The senior rater will 
prepare an honest, fair, and correct report evaluating eh NCO’s duty performance and 
potential.  Comments will support the performance and potential ratings in part V, blocks 
c through e of the NCO evaluation report.  

8.  By regulation (AR 635-5), the DD Form 214 shows the rank/grade at the time of 
separation. 

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found partial 
relief was warranted.  The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered.  The 
Board agreed there is sufficient evidence to grant the addition of the fourth AAM to his 
separation document.  He requested reconsideration of the decoration awarded at the 
time of his separation for an upgrade to a MSM.  Regulatory guidance provides 
requests for award reconsideration must be completed within one year from the date of 
the approval authority’s decision.  However, he may request review through a Member 
of Congress providing there is new, substantive, and material information.  

Based upon the document evidence provided by the applicant and found within the 
military service record, the Board found that the applicant’s record is void evidence 
showing he was in a promotable status when medically retired.  Therefore, the Board 
denied this portion of the relief.

BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

X	:X	:X	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:	:	:	DENY APPLICATION


?
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a 
recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all 
Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending 
his DD Form 214 for the period ending 30 October 2013 by deleting Army Achievement 
Medal (2nd Award), and adding Army Achievement Medal (4th Award).

2.  The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a 
portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of 
the application that pertains to promotion to SSG, and consideration and the granting of 
additional awards.

	  
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.

REFERENCES:

1.  Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military 
records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  
This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records 
(ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of 
limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.

2.  Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-22 (Military Awards), in effect at the time, states the 
Army Achievement Medal is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United 
States, who while serving in a noncombat area on or after 1 August 1981, distinguished 
themselves by meritorious service or achievement.  As with all personal decorations, 
formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement 
in orders are required.

3.  AR 600-8-22 states the Army Commendation Medal may be awarded to any member 
of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the 
Army after 6 December 1941, distinguishes himself or herself by heroism, meritorious 
achievement, or meritorious service.  As with all personal decorations, formal 
recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in 
orders are required.

4.  AR 623-5 (Evaluation Reporting System), in effect at the time, states the senior rater 
is primarily responsible for evaluating the noncommissioned officer’s (NCO) potential 
and providing oversight of the evaluation process.  The senior rater will prepare an 
honest, fair, and correct report evaluating eh NCO’s duty performance and potential.  
Comments will support the performance and potential ratings in part V, blocks c through 
e of the NCO evaluation report.  

5.  AR 635-5 (Separation Documents) at the time established the standardized policy for 
preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  The purpose of the separation document 
was to provide the individual with documentary evidence of their military service.  
Chapter 2 contained guidance on the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It stated, in part, 
that the DD Form 214 will show the active duty rank and pay grade at the time of the 
Soldier's separation; taken from the Soldier’s promotion/reduction orders

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20170007717
	
3

1