| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | |
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member |
2. The applicant requests, in effect, that the third (3rd) award of the Army Achievement Medal (AAM) be added to his records.
3. The applicant states, in effect, that he received the 3rd award of the AAM for meritorious service, from 7 October 1998 through 2 April 1999, and that this award was erroneously omitted from his separation document (DD Form 214). In support of his application, he provides a copy of a Recommendation for Award (DA Form 638), dated 31 March 1999.
4. The applicant’s military records show that he served on active duty in the Regular Army for 7 years, 10 months, and 18 days, from 21 March 1994 through 8 February 2002, at which time he was honorably discharged at the completion of his required active service.
5. The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant on the date of his separation,
8 February 2002, confirms, in Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized), that he earned the following awards during his active duty tenure: Army Lapel Button; Army Commendation Medal; Army Good Conduct Medal (2nd Award); National Defense Service Medal; Humanitarian Service Medal; Noncommissioned Officer’s Professional Development Ribbon; Army Service Ribbon; Driver and Mechanic Badge with Driver Bar; and AAM (2nd Award). The 3rd award of the AAM in question was not included in the list of authorized awards contained in this separation document.
6. The DA Form 638, dated 31 March 1999, provided by the applicant, confirms that he was recommended for the 3rd Award of the AAM, for meritorious service, for the period 7 October 1998 through 2 April 1999. Item 26 (Approval Authority) contains the following blocks giving the approval authority the options indicated: “approved”; “disapproved”; “recommend upgrade to”; and “downgrade to.” In this case, the approval authority placed an “x” in the “approved” block, and the other blocks containing other options were left blank, which indicates that the recommended award was approved.
7. Part V (Orders Data) of the DA Form 638, contains entries in Items 27a (Orders Issuing HQ) and 27b (Permanent Orders Number) which confirm that based on this award recommendation, Headquarters, 187th Medical Battalion,
Fort Sam Houston, Texas, issued Orders Number 091-1, awarding the applicant the recommended award. Item 28d (Signature) contains the signature of the Orders issuing official. However, Item 29 (Approved Award) of Part V was left blank and did not specifically indicate that the AAM was in fact the award authorized by these Orders.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was recommended for the
3rd award of the AAM in a DA Form 638, dated 31 March 1999. This document confirms, in Item 26 (Approval Authority), that the proper authority approved the recommended award. In addition, Part V (Orders Data) confirms that orders were issued authorizing the recommended award to the applicant.
2. The Board notes that the Item 29 (Approved Award), Part V (Orders Data) of the DA Form 638 was left blank. However, based on the portions of the form completed by the proper approval authority and orders issuing official, which verify that the recommended award was approved and orders were published authorizing the award, it is clear to the Board that Item 29 was left blank due to an administrative oversight. Therefore, it concludes that it would be appropriate at this time to correct the applicant’s record to show he was awarded the Army Achievement Medal (3rd Award), for meritorious service, for the period 7 October 1998 through 2 April 1999.
3. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing the individual concerned was awarded the Army Achievement Medal (3rd Award), for meritorious service, for the period 7 October 1998 through 2 April 1999; and by issuing him a corrected separation document that includes this award.
BOARD VOTE:
__FNE__ __RWA__ __RTD___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
___Fred N. Eichorn___
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2002066976 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/06/11 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 2002/02/08 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 C4 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | ETS |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 71 | 107.0025 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083111C070215
The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected to show that he earned three awards of the Army Achievement Medal (AAM 2 nd Oak Leaf Cluster) and the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM); and that he is a high school graduate. The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant on the date of his separation, 20 July 2002, does not include the AAM (2 nd Oak Leaf Cluster) or the ARCOM in the list of authorized awards contained in Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028018
The applicant provided award documents which show he was awarded the Army Achievement Medal (AAM) as follows: a. DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated 5 June 1996, recommended him for award of the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service for the period 5 June 1992 to 22 July 1996; however, this recommendation was downgraded to an AAM. The evidence of record confirms he was awarded eight AAMs by various orders issuing authorities. As a result, the Board recommends that all...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013767
A review of the applicant's military personnel records failed to reveal any orders or other evidence that shows he was awarded or recommended for the ARCOM. He adds that he does not know why the award recommendation was never forwarded to the approval authority. He adds he submitted the award recommendation in good faith, but does not know why the award recommendation was never forwarded to the approval authority.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088732C070403
The applicant provides a letter of explanation; a DD Form 214 for the period ending 28 February 2003; a DD Form 214 for the period ending 5 December 1999; three DA Forms 638-1 (Recommendation for Award of Army Achievement Medal, Army Commendation Medal, and Meritorious Service Medal); five DA Forms 638 (Recommendation for Award); DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record); DA Form 2A (Personnel Qualification Record, Part I); DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 8...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055681C070420
The applicant requests in effect, that his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214, be corrected to show that he served in Bosnia, to show the awards of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Medal, the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM), two awards of the Army Achievement Medal (AAM) and show that he completed the Combat Lifesaver Course. However, Army Regulation 635-5 provides that item 14 of the DD Form 214...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075219C070403
He provides his DD Form 214; two Recommendations for Award, DA Forms 638, showing he was awarded the AAM in 2000 and 2002; and his Personnel Qualification Record, DA Form 2-1, as supporting evidence. The applicant's DA Form 2-1, item 9 shows he was awarded the Army Service Ribbon. There is no evidence of record and the applicant has submitted none, such as the DA Form 638 that recommended him for and approved the award of the MOVSM, to show he was awarded the MOVSM.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014622
The applicant provides three DA Forms 638 (Recommendation for Award), Permanent Orders 216-020, and DD Form 214. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides for awards of the: a. By regulation, he served a qualifying period for award of the Korea Defense Service Medal; therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this award.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086706C070212
A DA Form 638 provided by the applicant confirms this award was approved by the proper authority and Part D (Orders Data) of the award recommendation shows that the announcement of the award was made in Orders Number 271-1, dated 27 September 2000, issued by Headquarters, 1 st Brigade Engineer, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was awarded the ARCOM and the AAM and that these awards were not included in the list of authorized awards contained in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010934
He also indicates that his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) and Enlisted Records Brief (ERB) clearly document these awards, and the DA Form 638 is the official orders for the second ARCOM, and as a result, it is unjust not to correct his record reflect these earned and previously issued awards. The applicant's Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1), which was prepared on 28 April 2004, includes an entry in Item 9 (Awards, Decorations, and Campaigns), which shows the applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120013220
The applicant requests award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) 2nd Award and that the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) 2nd Award and Army Achievement Medal (3rd Award) be added to her 1 July 2004 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty). She also provides a DA Form 638 that show he was awarded the ARCOM (1st Award) for meritorious service during the period 15 September 2000 through 11 January 2002; and a DA Form 638 that, notwithstanding the error in the...