Awards
Awards
Posted on Mar 20, 2025
What impact do you think the latest update to AR 600-8-22 Military Awards will have on soldiers receiving the recognition they deserve?
1.46K
33
7
6
6
0
It has always been the case for awards that as long as the recommender has first-hand knowledge of the actions that are the basis for the award, the recommender can be any rank and/or unit. However, the most recent update to the regulation states "The recommender must be senior in rank and associated with the recommended individual by virtue of their position within the chain of command. Additionally, the recommender must have knowledge of all actions or service cited. That is, the recommender must have either observed the actions or been provided information by an individual who observed the actions."
What are your thoughts on this change?
Do you agree with this change and why/why not?
Personally, I do not agree with this change. I think it will cause Soldiers not to receive the recognition they deserve due to the extra steps. Additionally, what is the point of "My Buddy PAR" in IPPS-A, if it still allows you recommend a Soldier who is senior in rank, despite the regulation now stating that is not authorized. I know it is a leader's job to ensure that deserving Soldiers are recognized when appropriate, however, this often doesn't happen and they have now made getting deserving Soldiers recognition harder.
What are your thoughts on this change?
Do you agree with this change and why/why not?
Personally, I do not agree with this change. I think it will cause Soldiers not to receive the recognition they deserve due to the extra steps. Additionally, what is the point of "My Buddy PAR" in IPPS-A, if it still allows you recommend a Soldier who is senior in rank, despite the regulation now stating that is not authorized. I know it is a leader's job to ensure that deserving Soldiers are recognized when appropriate, however, this often doesn't happen and they have now made getting deserving Soldiers recognition harder.
Awards
Army Regulations
Soldiers
Recognition
Posted 3 d ago
Responses: 6
The regulation was changed over a year ago, but I think you're reading too much into it because 'recommender' overlaps both "the person who is submitting a write-up" (i.e., recommending someone for an award) and "the individual officially submitting someone for the award" (i.e., the 'recommending official')
While it appears to be a change, in essence it's not and reflects the process in IPPS-A since it was rolled out. Regardless of an individual's rank, they can still use My Buddy PAR to submit another Soldier for an award in IPPS-A.
The only thing that changed would be the name in the 'recommending official' block on the DAF 638. SPC Snuffy can still put SGT Smith (who works for SSG Brown) in for an award through IPPS-A by creating a Buddy PAR. The PAR will be routed through SGT Smith's chain of command as it was before.
The only difference is that with the change last year, SPC Snuffy wouldn't be the recommending official, SSG Brown would be.
---------------------------------------------
* AR 600-8-22 (25 June 2015) - https://ec.militarytimes.com/static/pdfs/r600_8_22.pdf
* AR 600-8-22 (19 January 2024) - https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN30935-AR_600-8-22-000-WEB-1.pdf
While it appears to be a change, in essence it's not and reflects the process in IPPS-A since it was rolled out. Regardless of an individual's rank, they can still use My Buddy PAR to submit another Soldier for an award in IPPS-A.
The only thing that changed would be the name in the 'recommending official' block on the DAF 638. SPC Snuffy can still put SGT Smith (who works for SSG Brown) in for an award through IPPS-A by creating a Buddy PAR. The PAR will be routed through SGT Smith's chain of command as it was before.
The only difference is that with the change last year, SPC Snuffy wouldn't be the recommending official, SSG Brown would be.
---------------------------------------------
* AR 600-8-22 (25 June 2015) - https://ec.militarytimes.com/static/pdfs/r600_8_22.pdf
* AR 600-8-22 (19 January 2024) - https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN30935-AR_600-8-22-000-WEB-1.pdf
(8)
(0)
5
5
0
It's a crap change. Anyone with knowledge of an act that is meritorious or valorious should be able to recommend an award, not just the chain of command.
LTC (Join to see)
LTC (Join to see)
(5)
(0)
There are several things I do like about the "new system."
1) You submit the award electronically in a system that literally tracks where the award recommendation is in the routing chain; gone are the days of the 638 getting "lost."
2) You no longer have to wonder/worry who the award needs to go to for review/approval.
3) Anyone can still write the award recommendation.
What I do not like about the new system:
1) Finding out what the Soldier's IPPS-A's number is. This can be easily fixed by searching thru their UIC or have them get you their number from their IPPS-A profile.
Now, as for the process itself, nothing has changed regarding where some Leaders will guard awards using rank as a basis. You will have some Leasers guarding awards based on quota. Both those mentalities are still against regs, but it's still used.
As long as the recommender has a sound knowledge of what warrants whatever award is given and has a strong ability to articulate the bullets, then there should be no problem. Should being the key word. For example, submitting someone for an MSM for getting the fastest ruck time in the CO/BN/BDE should absolutely NOT warrant an MSM. It's about how big a positive impact the SMs actions have on the unit, the BN, the BDE, hell the entire TOA.
PVT Snuffy, standing tall in the guard tower single handedly defending the position against insurmountable odds, stopping the enemy from breaching the wire....Does Snuffy deserve an MSM, an ARCOM, a coin?
PVT Snuffy ensured his assigned vehicle was always maintained properly IOT execute every mission given.....Does Snuffy deserve an MSM, an ARCOM, or a coin?
What would you recommend PVT Snuffy for with each example? How would you write it?
The biggest concerns that still remain are those of someone actually sitting down to write the recommendation...and writing it well, and those that review and approve the awards. It will still always fall to personal opinion of the Intermediate Authorities and that of the Approving Authority.
1) You submit the award electronically in a system that literally tracks where the award recommendation is in the routing chain; gone are the days of the 638 getting "lost."
2) You no longer have to wonder/worry who the award needs to go to for review/approval.
3) Anyone can still write the award recommendation.
What I do not like about the new system:
1) Finding out what the Soldier's IPPS-A's number is. This can be easily fixed by searching thru their UIC or have them get you their number from their IPPS-A profile.
Now, as for the process itself, nothing has changed regarding where some Leaders will guard awards using rank as a basis. You will have some Leasers guarding awards based on quota. Both those mentalities are still against regs, but it's still used.
As long as the recommender has a sound knowledge of what warrants whatever award is given and has a strong ability to articulate the bullets, then there should be no problem. Should being the key word. For example, submitting someone for an MSM for getting the fastest ruck time in the CO/BN/BDE should absolutely NOT warrant an MSM. It's about how big a positive impact the SMs actions have on the unit, the BN, the BDE, hell the entire TOA.
PVT Snuffy, standing tall in the guard tower single handedly defending the position against insurmountable odds, stopping the enemy from breaching the wire....Does Snuffy deserve an MSM, an ARCOM, a coin?
PVT Snuffy ensured his assigned vehicle was always maintained properly IOT execute every mission given.....Does Snuffy deserve an MSM, an ARCOM, or a coin?
What would you recommend PVT Snuffy for with each example? How would you write it?
The biggest concerns that still remain are those of someone actually sitting down to write the recommendation...and writing it well, and those that review and approve the awards. It will still always fall to personal opinion of the Intermediate Authorities and that of the Approving Authority.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google 
