IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 March 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080016180 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, in effect, that he be awarded the Meritorious Service Medal as a retirement award. 2. The applicant states that he retired at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. He was attached to the U.S. Army Recruiting District, Des Moines, Iowa, but was assigned to Fort Lewis, Washington. The Meritorious Service Medal was never received. 3. The applicant provides, in support of his request, a copy of his 31 December 1993 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant, a career noncommissioned officer, retired as a staff sergeant, pay grade E-6, by reason of length of service on 31 January 1993. 3. Block 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 does not show award of the Meritorious Service Medal. 4. There is no available evidence that the applicant was recommended for or awarded the Meritorious Service Medal or any other medal as a retirement award. 5. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the Meritorious Service Medal is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States or of a friendly foreign nation who distinguish themselves by outstanding meritorious achievement or service in a noncombat area. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. Recommendations must be made within 2 years of the event or period of service and the award must be made within 3 years. There are regulatory provisions for lost recommendations but not for late recommendations, reconsideration, nor for upgrading to a more prestigious award. The regulation also provides that there is no automatic entitlement to an award upon departure either from an assignment or from the service. 6. Title 10 of the U.S. Code, section 1130 provides the legal authority for consideration of proposals for decorations not previously submitted in timely fashion. It allows, in effect, that upon the request of a Member of Congress, the Secretary concerned shall review a proposal for the award or presentation of a decoration (or the upgrading of a decoration), either for an individual or a unit, that is not otherwise authorized to be presented or awarded due to limitations established by law or policy for timely submission of a recommendation for such award or presentation. Based upon such review, the Secretary shall make a determination as to the merits of approving the award or presentation of the decoration. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant states the Meritorious Service Medal was never received. 2. There is no available evidence that the applicant was ever recommended for or awarded the Meritorious Service Medal. The applicant did not even contend that he had been recommended for or awarded this medal. He reported, only that he had not received it. 3. 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 this requirement. 4. While the available evidence is insufficient for awarding the applicant a Meritorious Service Medal, this in no way affects the applicant’s right to pursue his claim for the Meritorious Service Medal by submitting a request through his Member of Congress under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1130. 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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _________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) AR20080016180 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080016180 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1