IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 November 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090010315 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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) for the period ending 30 September 1977 to reflect two awards of the Meritorious Service Medal. 2. The applicant states his DD Form 214 reflects award of one Meritorious Service Medal. However he notes that he was awarded two different certificates, each with its own citation, and each signed and dated by two different general officers on two different dates for two different reasons. 3. The applicant provides copies of Meritorious Service Medal certificates, dated 5 December 1974 and 7 March 1975, in support of his request. 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. Records available to the Board indicate the applicant entered active duty as a Regular Army (RA) enlisted Soldiers on 4 September 1957 and he served continuously through a series of reenlistments until he retired for length of service on 30 September 1977 in the rank/grade of colonel (COL)/O-6. His DD Form 214 reflects award of one Meritorious Service Medal. 3. Documents in the applicant’s records show that on 5 December 1974, General Orders Number 107, published by Headquarters, William Beaumont Army Medical Center, El Paso, TX, awarded him the Meritorious Service Medal for meritorious service during the period 1 August 1972 to 1 August 1974. The award certificate provided by the applicant, dated 5 December 1974, coincide with this award of the Meritorious Service Medal, and it was signed by the then Commanding General of William Beaumont Army Medical Center. 4. On 7 March 1975, General Orders Number 28, published by the same headquarters, revoked General Orders Number 107. 5. On 7 March 1975 a Meritorious Service Medal certificate was signed by the Commanding General, U.S. Army Health Services Command, Fort Sam Houston, TX. This award recognized the applicant for meritorious achievement during the period 1 August 1972 to 1 August 1974. Orders confirming this award was announced in General Orders Number 84, published by Headquarters, United States Army Health Service Command, on 10 March 1975. 6. Paragraph 1-18 of Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states that only one decoration will be awarded to an individual for the same act, achievement, or period of meritorious service. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. Although the award certificates were issued on two different dates and signed by two different officials the awards were for the same period of service and as such would have been considered duplicate awards. As a result, the award issued by Headquarters, William Beaumont Army Medical Center was revoked when its higher headquarters, Health Services Command issued the award. 2. In view of the foregoing, the applicant is entitled to only one award of the Meritorious Service and that award is correctly reflected on his DD Form 214 for the period ending 30 September 1977. 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 the aforementioned requirement. 4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request. 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) AR20090010315 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090010315 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1