ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 September 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20180003987 APPLICANT REQUESTS: that his downgraded Bronze Star Medal (BSM) to a Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) for service performed during Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) in Ramadi Iraq from 2009-2010 be upgraded to a BSM. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * self-authored narrative of claim * original DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award) * reconsideration memorandum * letter of justification * new DA Form 638 * DA Form 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report) * MSM * Congressional correspondence * three Human Resources Command (HRC) letters * Army Review Board Agency (ARBA) letter * email * officer record brief (ORB) * applicant BSM reconsideration memorandum 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 (ABCMR) 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 the BSM was downgraded by the 1st Theater Sustainment Command (TSC) commander (CDR) in Kuwait based on a quota system and not merit. According to the letter from HRC, Awards and Decorations Branch, dated 22 January 2018, and Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-22 (Military Awards), paragraph 3- 15 and 3-16, the MSM appears to have been awarded erroneously and the BSM would have been a more appropriate, equivalent award. In April 2009, he was deployed to Iraq as CDR of Headquarters and Headquarters Battery (HHB), 3rd Battalion (BN), 157th Field Artillery (FA) from the CO Army National Guard (COARNG) in support of OIF, in Ramadi Iraq. In November the BN S1 discovered that his award was downgraded from a BSM to an MSM. His award was the only one in the BN the CDR downgraded. The BN S1 resubmitted the award for reconsideration to the 1st TSC but never received a response by the time they redeployed back in March 2010. His BN CDR pursued the matter again by submitting a letter in August 2010 (enclosed in packet) to the1st TSC in Kuwait but never received a reply. In his self-authored narrative of claim, he explains the actions he has taken to request a reconsideration for a BSM. 3. The applicant provides: a. The original DA Form 638 and narrative were submitted on 24 November 2009, for a BSM, period of award 28 June 2009 to 15 April 2010. For exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding service to the U.S. as the HHB CDR, 3rd BN, 157th FA, Ramadi, Iraq, during OIF 9.2. The BSM was downgraded to an MSM on 22 April 2010. The DA Form 638 and narrative are enclosed in the packet for review. b. On 5 August 2010, the 3rd BN, 157th FA commander requested a reconsideration of the BSM through memorandum to the 1st TSC commander. He stated that the applicant, one of his four subordinate commanders, was the only one whose was downgraded, yet he was the star performer among them. He provided a detailed reconsideration memorandum (enclosed in packet). c. On 15 February 2017, the applicant produced a letter of justification for the downgraded BSM through a memorandum for record (MFR). It states the recommendation for the award was put in 3 months into our deployment because of a lead time placed on our unit to ensure all awards were processed in time. As a result only a third of achievements were captured in the initial DA Form 638/narrative. After submission, his award was downgraded by the approval authority who at the time was the 1st TSC commander in Kuwait to an MSM. The award was during combat operations and for service in Ramadi Iraq from April 2009 to April 2010. The BN S1 described that 1st TSC only awarded a certain percentage of BSM's to each BN under their administrative control. Therefore, instead of looking at each award based on merit, duties, responsibilities and performance, the awards were awarded based on quotas and percentages. He provided a detailed MFR (enclosed in packet). d. On 15 November 2016, the 3rd BN, 157th FA commander requested a reconsideration of the BSM by sending a DA Form 638 and narrative to HRC. The DA Form 638 and narrative are enclosed in the packet for review. e. His DA Form 67-9 for 9 February 2009 to 8 February 2010, his rater rated him as “outstanding performance, must promote” and his senior rater rated him as “best qualified.” f. His MSM for 28 June 2009 to 15 April 2010, in support of Iraqi Freedom. g. Congressional correspondence, dated 16 August 2016, to congressman X___ X___, states that HRC requested that the applicant have a congressional referral. h. On 30 August 2016, HRC informed Congressman X___ that reconsideration of a previously approved award is contingent upon the presentation of new, substantive, and material information regarding the Soldier's service and achievements and would require to be resubmitted through his current chain of command. i. In response to an application received for a BSM upgrade on 10 August 2015, the ARBA informed the applicant on 6 May 2016 that he had to exhaust all of his administrative remedies and referred him to the Army Awards and Decoration Branch, HRC. j. In response to a letter received from Congressman X___ for a BSM in lieu of an MSM, dated 17 February 2017, HRC informed him of the following on 3 March 2017: * the new DA Form 638, dated 15 November 2016, block 24 (Intermediate Authority) must be endorsed by Major General (MG) X___ X. X___, U.S.A. Retired * still required additional justification for reconsideration, an amended citation and narrative presenting new, substantive and material information, which fundamentally changes the scope and magnitude of the [applicant's] service and achievements k. An email [unknown date], from the BSM requestor, Colonel (COL) X___ to the applicant, states “Hate to tell you that MG (Ret) X___ was not willing to reconsider.” He said "I do not have the background on why I reduced the award to an MSM but I did maintain the process IAW regs while in the position. Based on that I would not be open to a reconsideration." l. His ORB dated 31 August 2017. m. On 7 September 2017, the applicant sent a BSM reconsideration memorandum to the Awards and Decorations Branch, HRC, stating COL X___ submitted a new DA Form 638, redrafted it, and outlined the significant contributions in the latter part of our deployment in Ramadi, Iraq. The DA Form 638 was again endorsed by the 115th FA Brigade Commander, currently Brigadier General X___, U.S.A. Retired. At [HRC’S] request Colonel X___ sent the award to MG X___, U.S.A. Retired, he did not endorse the award. Additional comments may be reviewed (memorandum enclosed in packet). n. On 22 January 2018, the Army Awards and Decoration Branch, HRC, responded to the applicant, stating they were unable to take administrative action regarding his case. Based on details included in the original award recommendation and the approved citation, the award appears to recognize combat-specific achievements and/or service rendered under combat conditions. Therefore, in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-22, paragraphs 3-15 and 3-16, the MSM appears to have been awarded erroneously and the BSM would be a more appropriate, equivalent award. Consequently, their office has no authority to make award determinations based on allegations of procedural error and referred him to the ABCMR. 5. A review of the applicant’s service record shows: a. The applicant previously served in an enlisted status in the Regular Army, he was appointed as a Reserve second lieutenant and executed an oath of office on 24 August 2002. b. On 3 August 2015, the applicant submitted an ABCMR for an upgrade of his downgraded BSM. On 6 May 2016, the ARBA informed the applicant that he had to exhaust all of his administrative remedies and referred him to the Army Awards and Decoration Branch, HRC. c. The original and new DA Form 638s and narrative are enclosed in the packet for review. d. The applicant is currently serving in the COARNG. 6. By regulation, AR 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Bronze Star Medal is awarded in time of war for heroism and for 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. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found relief was not warranted. The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered. Regulatory guidance allowed for the awarding of the MSM in lieu of the BSM in combat theater. The award approval authority exercised his authority and approved the MSM after reviewing the achievements. The Board agreed the achievements listed within the award recommendation confirm there was no error or injustice with the approval of the MSM. ? BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING X X X DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 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 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 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Bronze Star Medal is awarded in time of war for heroism and for 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. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. NOTHING FOLLOWS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20180003987 4 1