2.  The applicant requests correction of his separation document (DD Form 214) dated 5 July 1991 to show that he was promoted to the pay grade of E-4 and that he was authorized awards of the Southwest Asia Service Medal (SWASM), the Kuwait Liberation Medal (KLM), and the British Army Parachute Wings.

3.  The applicant states that he was promoted to the pay grade of E-4 and that his DD Form 214 prepared at the time of his separation did not contain all of his authorized awards.  In support of his application, the applicant submits copies of his promotion orders, a copy of his DD Form 214, and a certificate from the British Army awarding him the British Army Parachute Wings.

4.  The applicant’s military records were not available for review by the Board.  However, the documents submitted by the applicant are sufficient for the Board to make a determination on the applicant’s requests.

5.  The DD Form 214 submitted by the applicant indicates that he served in Southwest Asia (SWA) from 21 August 1990 through 12 April 1991.  These dates coincide with the amount of foreign service he was credited with and entitles him to award of the SWASM and the KLM.

6.  The DD Form 214 also indicates that the applicant was honorably released from active duty on 5 July 1991 in the pay grade of E-3 and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).  The promotion orders provided by the applicant indicate that he was promoted to the pay grade of E-4 on 10 January 1993 (subsequent to his discharge), while assigned to a USAR unit in New York.  Accordingly, there is no basis to make this change to his records.

7.  The certificate provided by the applicant awarding him the British Army Parachute Wings indicateS that he qualified as a British parachutist and was entitled to wear British Parachute Wings.  The certificate was authenticated in July 1990 by the British Regimental Colonel.  There is no indication that the applicant ever received approval by the Department to wear the British Parachutist Wings.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 serves as the authority for individual military awards.  It states, in pertinent part, that commanders serving in the rank of brigadier general or higher and colonel level commanders who exercise general court-martial authority are delegated authority to approve (in writing) the acceptance, retention, and permanent wear of foreign badges.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 also prescribes the authority for award of the SWASM.  It states, in pertinent part, that the SWASM is awarded to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States serving in SWA and contiguous waters or airspace thereover, on or after 2 August 1990 to 16 July 1991.  To be eligible for award of the SWASM, soldiers must be attached to or regularly serving for one or more days with an organization participating in ground/shore (military) operations, or actually participating as a crew member in one or more aerial flights directly supporting military operations or, serving on temporary duty for 30 consecutive days or 60 nonconsecutive days.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, in regards to the award of the KLM, states, in pertinent part, that the KLM is awarded to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States serving in SWA and its contiguous waters or airspace thereover, in support of Operation Desert Storm during the period 17 January 1991 to 28 February 1991.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant served in SWA during the period required to be eligible for awards of the SWASM and the KLM.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to award him those medals and correct his records accordingly.

2.  Inasmuch as the applicant was promoted subsequent to his discharge, it would not be appropriate to change the applicant’s DD Form 214 to reflect that he held the pay grade of E-4 at the time of his discharge when in fact he held the pay grade of E-3.  

3.  Although the applicant was awarded the British Army Parachute Badge by the British Army officials, he has provided no evidence to show that the award was properly approved for acceptance, retention, and wear by Department officials as required by applicable regulations.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to show that it was properly approved, it is not appropriate to indicate the award in the applicant’s records.

4.  In view of the foregoing, it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was awarded the SWASM and the KLM for his service in SWA.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

                       GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




		                           
		        CHAIRPERSON