ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 October 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190009019 APPLICANT REQUESTS: a. correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show award of the Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device and b. an upgrade of his the Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device to the Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device for himself and his crew. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record), dated 11 June 2019 * Headquarters, 2d Armored Division (Forward), Permanent Orders 001-019, dated 17 March 1991 * Army Commendation Medal with First Oak Leaf Cluster Certificate, dated 29 May 1991 * DD Form 214 * By-Name List of Crew (Remarks Block of DD Form 149) (was not attached with his application) 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: a. The missing entry on his DD Form 214 was an oversight and he should have noticed it and brought it to someone's attention. His Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device Citation was not adequate recognition. He believes the commanders were in unfamiliar territory and were unsure of the degree of recognition to award for his actions that occurred during battle. His Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device was hastily awarded based on impact on the battlefield. b. After his redeployment to his home station, commanders upgraded most awards presented for Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm. His crew was overlooked while he was on temporary duty for the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course. Lives were put on the line during the Gulf War with men and women participating in heroic actions and deserving of appropriate recognition and this is one of those instances where it did not happen. 3. The applicant's records contain sufficient evidence (two awards of the Army Commendation Medal, one of which with a V Device (Permanent Orders 001-019, dated 17 March 1991)) for administratively correcting his records without Board action. His DD Form 214 will be administratively corrected to show award of the Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device. 4. The Board will consider his request for an upgrade of his Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device to the Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device. 5. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 27 June 1978. He served in Southwest Asia from 2 August 1990 to 8 May 1991. 6. Permanent Orders 001-019, dated 17 March 1991, issued by Headquarters, 2nd Armored Division (Forward), awarded him the Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device for heroism during the period 26 February to 28 February 1991, together with a certificate with 1st oak leaf cluster, dated 22 May 1991, that shows the medal was awarded meritorious achievement from 26 February to 28 February 1991 and reads: For meritorious achievement from 26 February to 28 February 1991 while assigned to 2nd Battalion, 66th Armor Regiment, 2nd Armored Division (Forward), during Operation Desert Storm. [Applicant] maneuvered his tank without hesitation across a berm and into direct fire to engage and destroy two enemy tanks that were conducting a flank ambush on a sister platoon. His swift action thwarted the ambush and saved the lives of the entire platoon. [Applicant's] courage and tactical competence reflect great credit upon him, his unit, and the United States Army. 7. His record contains a DA Form 2166-7 (Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report) that covers the period June 1990 through May 1991 and shows in: a. Part IIIa (Principal Duty Title) – M1 Armor Crew, and Part IIIc (Duties and Scope) – he was responsible for the maintenance, maneuverability, and all the equipment on a M1A tank valued at $2.5 million. He was also responsible for the health and welfare of three other Soldiers and their individual training. b. Part Iva (Rater Overall Potential for Promotion and/or Service in Positions of Greater Responsibility) – his rater assessed him as "Fully Capable," c. Part Vc (Senior Rater Overall Performance) – his senior rater marked him as "Successful" in block 2 and Part Vd (Senior Rater Overall Potential for Promotion and/or Service in Positions of Greater Responsibility) – his senior rater marked him as "Superior" in block 2 of a possible 5. 8. His records also contains an Army Commendation Medal with 2nd oak leaf cluster Certificate, dated 30 April 1992, awarded for meritorious service from 17 October 1989 to 30 April 1992. 9. He retired on 31 July 1996. His DD Form 214 show she was awarded or authorized: * Army Commendation Medal (2nd Oak Leaf Cluster) * Army Achievement Medal (4th Oak Leaf Cluster) * Good Conduct Medal (4th Award) * National Defense Service Medal * NCO Professional Development Ribbon with Numeral 3 * Kuwait Liberation Medal (Kuwait) * Southwest Asia Service Medal with 3 bronze service stars * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16) * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar (M-9 mm) * Kuwait Liberation Medal (Saudi Arabia) 10. There is no evidence the applicant submitted a request to the U.S. Army Human Resources Command for an upgrade of his Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device. 11. The applicant indicated on his application that he provided a By-Name List of Crew (Remarks Block of DD Form 149). This list was not enclosed with his application. Furthermore, the applicant did not show the members of his crew were incapable of acting on their own behalf, missing, or deceased. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found partial relief is warranted. 2. The Board found no evidence indicating the applicant has submitted a request for upgrade of his Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device through a member of Congress to the U.S. Army Human Resources Command for consideration under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1130. The Board determined it would be premature to make a recommendation to deny or approve an upgrade when the applicant has not exhausted an administrative remedy available to him. 3. The Board concurred with the corrections described in Administrative Note(s) below. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF :XXX :XXX :XXX 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 making the corrections described in Administrative Note(s) below. 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 upgrading the Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device. 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): A review of the applicant’s records shows his DD Form 214 contains and administrative error as it omitted his V Device. As a result, amend his DD Form 214 as follows: * Delete Army Commendation Medal (2nd Oak Leaf Cluster) * Add Army Commendation Medal (3rd Award) with "V" Device 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) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual and unit military awards. a. 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. b. 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. c. The bronze "V" device indicates acts of heroism involving conflict with an armed enemy and authorizes the device in conjunction with awards of the Army Commendation Medal, the Air Medal, and the Bronze Star Medal. Although more than one award of the Army Commendation Medal, the Air Medal, or the Bronze Star Medal may be made for heroism to the same person, only one "V" device may be worn on awards of these medals. d. 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, USC, 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 for timely submission of a recommendation. e. Recommendations are submitted for reconsideration or appeal only if new, substantive, and material information is furnished, and the time limits specified in paragraph 1-14 do not prevent such action. Requests for reconsideration or appeal must be forwarded through the same official channels as the original recommendation. The additional justification for reconsideration or appeal must be in letter format, not to exceed two single-spaced typewritten pages. A copy of the original recommendation, with all endorsements, and the citation must be attached. If the original recommendation is not available, a reconstructed recommendation should be submitted. f. If the reconsideration or appeal is approved and when a lesser decoration has already been approved, action is taken by the awarding authority or HRC, Awards and Decorations Board to revoke the lesser awarded decoration. 3. Title 10, USC, section 1130, provides the legal authority for consideration of proposals for decorations not previously submitted in a timely fashion. a. Upon the request of a Member of Congress, the Secretary concerned shall review a proposal for the award of or upgrading of a decoration. Based upon such review, the Secretary shall determine the merits of approving the award. b. The request, with a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), must be submitted through a Member of Congress to the Secretary of the Army at the following agency: Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Attention: AHRC- PDP-A, 1600 Spearhead Division Avenue, Fort Knox, KY 40122. The applicant's unit must be clearly identified along with the period of assignment and the award being recommended. A narrative of the actions or period for which recognition is being requested must accompany the DA Form 638. Requests for consideration of awards should be supported by sworn affidavits, eyewitness statements, certificates, and related documents. Corroborating evidence is best provided by commanders, leaders and fellow Soldiers who had personal knowledge of the circumstances and events relative to the request. The burden and costs for researching and assembling documentation to support approval of requested awards and decorations rest with the requestor. 4. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) provides Department of the Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions regarding an applicant's request for the correction of a military record. Instruction state an applicant with a proper interest may request correction of another person's military records when that person is incapable of acting on his or her own behalf, missing, or deceased. Depending on the circumstances, a child, spouse, parent, or other close relative, heir, or legal representative (such as a guardian or executor) of the Soldier or former Soldier may be able to demonstrate a proper interest. Applicants must send proof of proper interest with the application when requesting correction of another person's military records. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190009019 4 1