IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  20 February 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130007672 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier application for award of the Military Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal (MOVSM) for service with the Michigan Army National Guard (MIARNG).

2.  The applicant states that:

	a.  the battalion officials' assertion that they sent the recommendation back to the company is sufficient evidence to show that the company commander recommended him for the award.

	b.  he sustained traumatic brain injury in the Iraq war and suffers short term and long term cognitive problems.

3.  The applicant provides copies of documents labeled:

	enclosure 1 – a letter from a member of congress
	enclosure 2 – an extract from Army Regulation 15-185 Army Board for Correction of Military Records) on reconsiderations
	enclosure 3 – his original application
	enclosure 4 – a highlighted paragraph from the original Board consideration
	enclosure 5 – an extract from Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards)
	enclosure 6 – a 30 January 2007 email to the applicant
	enclosure 7 – applicant's letter to the ABCMR, dated 17 October 2011 


COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

The applicant lists veteran's service organization as counsel; however, it provided no additional information.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20110020951 on 24 April 2013.

2.  The original case dealt with several awards in various periods of service including award of the MOVSM for service with the MIARNG.  The applicant's counsel submitted evidence and argument to show that various recommendations to award the applicant the MOVSM had been submitted. 

3.  The Board noted the regulatory requirements for the MOVSM state it may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States and their reserve components who, subsequent to 31 December 1992, perform outstanding volunteer community service of a sustained, direct, and consequential nature.  To qualify for award of the MOVSM a service member's volunteer service must meet the following requirements:

		(1)  be to the civilian community, to include the military family community; 

		(2)  be significant in nature and produce tangible results;

		(3)  reflect favorably on the military service and the Department of Defense; and

		(4)  be of a sustained and direct nature.

4.  After considering the requirements for the MOVSM and the applicant's evidence the Board concluded that:

	a.  Although he submitted multiple DA Forms 638 from various individuals who appear to have recommended him for this award, none of these forms was endorsed by his commander nor approved by the approval authority.  More importantly, this award requires commanders to certify the volunteer service was performed on a voluntary basis, not detailed or tasked and that the services performed may not be part of any military mission (for example a unit project), and may not result in any personal gain.  
   b.  Commanders must certify the service was accomplished within the civilian community, to include the military family community; be significant in nature and produce tangible results; reflect favorably on the military service and the Department of Defense; and be of a sustained and direct nature.  

5.  The applicant's current submissions and arguments include: 

	a.  The highlighted paragraph from the original Board's conclusions 	(as cited above) that the documents submitted did not show either the commander's endorsement or award authority approval.

	b.  The 30 January 2007 email to the applicant from a staff sergeant with the MIARNG.  It reads:  "…Hope this finds you well!  There were several request(s) for those awards with you being the requester as well as one for you.  Those request(s) were returned to the unit for correction about a year ago.  I will check on the status with the unit, but they are not at the Battalion and have not been for a while.  Also, you sent your original status request to D----- not to me…"

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant asserts that the battalion officials' statement that the battalion staff had sent the recommendation back to the company is sufficient evidence to show that the company commander recommended him for the award.

2.  Contrary to the applicant's assertion, the fact that the battalion sent the recommendations back for correction could just as likely mean that the company commander had not signed or recommended approval of such award.

3.  Nothing in the original submission or in  this request for reconsideration demonstrates that a recommendation to award the applicant the MOVSM was favorably endorsed through the chain of command and approved by the official having authority to award this medal.

4. 	Notwithstanding the "thank you" letters and the character reference letters, approval authorities must ensure the service to be honored merits the special recognition as this award is intended to recognize exceptional community support over time and not a single act or achievement.  Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to show the applicant met the criteria for this award.

5.  Whether or not the State of Michigan has an established policy for lost military awards is unknown.  However, there is insufficient evidence to justify a recommendation that the MIARNG award the applicant the MOVSM. 

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  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 that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20110020951, dated 24 April 2012.




      __________x_______________
       	   CHAIRPERSON
      
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.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130007672





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130007672



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1