Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10969-07
Original file (10969-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100






CRS
 Docket No: 10969—07
27 September 2008

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 24 January 2008, a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. In this connection the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.










It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,





W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director




Enclosure






















DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
         QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103



                                             IN REPLY REFER TO:
                            1650
                                                                                           MM MA - 2
                                                                                           24 Jan 08

MEMOR~J1JjJ~ FOR THE     EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS, 2 NAVY ANNEX, WASHINGTON, DC 20390-5100
From:    Commandant of the Marine Corps
Subj:    COMMENTS ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF THE BELOW LISTED MARINE TO CORRECT THE CLASSIFICATION OF HIS MERITORIOUS SERVICE MEDAL, FOR SERVICE IN SUPPORT OF COMBAT OPERATIONS IN IRAQ, TO THE COMBAT EQUIVALENT OF THE BRONZE STAR MEDAL:
         
         Ref:     (a)      DOD 1348.33-N
                  (b)      SECNAVINST 1650.1H
                  (c)      MCO l650.19J
                  (d)      10 U.S.C. Section 1133
End:     (1) Request for Administrative Correction
 (2)      DD Form 149
1.       DISCUSSION : Enclosures (1) and (2) were forwarded to the Military Awards Branch (MMMA), Headquarters Marine Corps for action.
2.       Pursuant to reference (a) and reference (b), the petitioner asserts that an injustice exists because his Meritorious Service Medal (MSM), which was awarded for meritorious service in support of combat operations, was issued in error. He requests that BCNR correct this error by changing the award to the Bronze Star Medal (BSM).
3.       Consistent with references (b) and (c), MMMA has no authority to summarily change a previously presented award or an award that is still in the recommendation and approval process.
4.       The following issues for consideration are provided.
a.       As stated in reference (b), the MEM is “the counterpart of the BSM for the recognition of meritorious non-combat service.” Also, the Combat Distinguishing Device is not authorized for this award.
b.       Concerning the BSM, reference (b) states that this award is for “heroic or meritorious achievement or service...while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States; (or) while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force; or while serving with friendly forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.” Furthermore, in accordance with references (b) and (d), the recipient must be in receipt of Imminent Danger Pay (IDP) during the qualifying period. Finally, the Combat Distinguishing Device may be authorized.
5.       The Commander, U.S. Marine Forces Central Command has been delegated authority to award the BSM (with Combat “V”) and below. In this capacity, the awarding authority evaluated each and every award against the slated criteria and as evidenced by this request, determined that some cases are best suited for the BSM while others are better suited for the MSM.

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02297

    Original file (BC 2014 02297.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Per USCENTAF Decoration Guidebook dated 27 Dec 04, A2.9, the MSM is awarded for outstanding non-combat meritorious achievement or service to the United States. When the eligibility requirements for the law and the USCENTAF guidebook are compared, the facts quoted in the DPSID advisory make him eligible for the BSM. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02624

    Original file (BC 2014 02624.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    While it is noted the applicant’s AF IMT 3994, Recommendation for Decoration Deployment/Contingency Operations, dated , does not mention the BSM, and the applicant does not have a recommendation for upgrade from someone with firsthand knowledge of the act/achievement, preferably from someone within his chain of command at the time of the act/achievement, a proposed citation, or eyewitness statements, AFPC/DPSIDR believed based on the MSM recommendation package the applicant's actions were at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-01828

    Original file (BC-2010-01828.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01828 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The applicant requests that her late father’s records be corrected to reflect his entitlement to the following awards and decorations: 1. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDRA recommends...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012047

    Original file (20110012047.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was awarded the BSM with "V" Device, BSM (3rd Award), and the MSM (2nd Award). Because his records are classified, they contain no award orders, and he has not provided sufficient evidence such as official orders showing he was awarded the BSM with "V" Device (4th Award) and MSM (3rd Award).

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018076

    Original file (20110018076.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states: * he served in Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) X * he was awarded a Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) for meritorious service * his command identified the MSM was in error and resubmitted and approved award of the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) for meritorious service for the same period, revoking the MSM * revocation orders for the MSM were filed in his OMPF and the MSM Certificate was removed * he feels a promotion/school board might get the wrong idea...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01074-01

    Original file (01074-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 2001, a copy of which is attached. they were not present and cannot attest Statements from which would qualify him for the Purple Since there is no indication in the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076066C070215

    Original file (2002076066C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, limited medical records were provided to the Board as well as the applicant’s separation documents. One document in the applicant’s remaining military records shows him as a Tec 3. However, the CMB is not listed on the applicant’s separation document nor are there any orders for the CMB contained in his military records.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06816-07

    Original file (06816-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The administratively complete award recommendation package must consist of the following: (1) a Personal Award Recommendation (OPNAV 1650/3) (which includes the specific date(s) (day, month, and year) of Mr. Breidenbach's service) routed through his original chain of command for their review, comments, and recommendations; if all of the members of the chain of command are deceased, the recommending officer must include a signed statement indicating this fact, (2) a detailed summary of action...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068168C070402

    Original file (2002068168C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. This document shows the unit to which the applicant was assigned was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation for the period 15 April 1969 to 16 March 1971 by Department of the Army General Order Number 5, dated 1973. NOTE : Request that the Army Review Boards Agency, Support Division, St. Louis, Missouri...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03975-01

    Original file (03975-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) concurred with the board of generals and denied the recommendation of your former CO. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found no evidence that would warrant rcV1l. Subsequently, the Commandant determined, after reviewing the Consequently, no further action can be taken. the awarding authority, reviews, including those as provided for by Subtitle C, Section 526 of the National Defense Authorization Act for...