IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 27 May 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090020047 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 that his Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) be added to his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). 2. The applicant states his DD Form 214 should reflect the highest award he was given. 3. The applicant provides his DD Form 214, his ARCOM certificate, and a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award). 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's military records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 February 1994, was awarded the military occupational specialty of infantryman, and was promoted to pay grade E-4. 3. He was honorably released from active duty on 30 June 1997. The DD Form 214 he was issued does not list the ARCOM. However, it does list one award of the Army Achievement Medal (AAM). 4. The applicant's ARCOM certificate shows he was awarded the ARCOM by Permanent Order Number 154-1 on 3 June 1997. However, his DA Form 638 shows that while the applicant was recommended for the ARCOM, the recommendation was downgraded to an AAM and published in Permanent Order Number 154-1 on 3 June 1997. This form shows this was the applicant's second award of the AAM (AAM with 1st Oak Leaf Cluster). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. It would appear that the applicant's ARCOM certificate was prepared in error. The order number verifies the applicant's ARCOM recommendation was downgraded to an AAM. As such, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request. 2. However, the applicant's DD Form 214 only lists one AAM and the DA Form 638 confirms it was a second award of the AAM. Therefore, it would be appropriate to add this award to his DD Form 214. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ____X___ __X_____ __X_____ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that the DD Form 214 of the individual concerned be corrected by: * deleting the AAM * adding the AAM with 1st Oak Leaf Cluster 2. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to the ARCOM. ________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) AR20090020047 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090020047 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1