APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his records be corrected to show his entitlement to award of the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) for Valor (V).

APPLICANT STATES:  That, due to policy or lack of it, the request for award of a BSM (V) was not acted on.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

On 6 December 1990, the applicant was ordered to active duty with his Army Reserve unit, in support of Desert Shield/Storm.

During the period 24 December 1990-4 April 1991, the applicant served in Southwest Asia.

On 6 May 1991, the applicant was honorably released from active duty under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4.  His Report of Separation indicates he had 5 months and 1 day of creditable service.  He was entitled to award of the Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) with 2 Oak Leaf Clusters (2 OLC), the Army Achievement Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the Armed Forces Reserve Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Kuwait Liberation Medal (KLM), the Southwest Asia Service Medal, the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal, and, the Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon.

On 16 July 1992, 18 months after the event for which he was being recommended, his unit commander completed DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award) for the BSM for heroism.

On 6 February 1994, a 416th Engineer Command Awards Board, after a thorough and lengthy review, rejected the recommendation for the BSM (V) in total.  The board concluded that the applicant did his job, nothing more - nothing less.

On 10 March 1997, the Commander, US Total Army Personnel Command, opined (COPY ATTACHED) that contrary to the applicant’s allegations, his recommendation had been reviewed by the appropriate command and denied in total.  Further, it was recommended that the applicant’s record be corrected to show entitlement to the ARCOM with 3 OLC and the KLM (Saudi Arabia)(SA) and the KLM (Kuwait)(KU) 

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion, it is concluded:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant’s recommendation was given every consideration and denied, in total.

3.  The Commander, PERSCOM, recommended the applicant’s records be administratively corrected to show entitlement to the ARCOM (3 OLC), the KLM (SA) and the KLM (KU).

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

NOTE: The Commander, ARPERCEN, is requested to administratively correct the applicant’s record by deleting ARCOM (2 OLC) and the KLM and by adding the ARCOM (3 OLC), the KLM (SA) and the KLM (KU).


BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT          

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director