IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 March 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140010974 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 his Legion of Merit (LOM) (2nd Award) be added to his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with a separation date of 31 August 1970. 2. The applicant states the LOM (2nd Award) was not entered on his DD Form 214 because it was made after the retirement process. 3. The applicant provides: * his DD Form 214 * a certificate for award of the LOM (2nd Award), dated 7 July 1970 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 served honorably as an enlisted member on active duty from 25 February 1948 to 8 April 1952. 3. On 9 April 1952, he was commissioned as a second lieutenant and entered active duty. 4. On 31 August 1970, he was honorably retired after 22 years, 6 months, and 6 days of active duty service in the rank of LTC/O-5. His DD Form 214 shows one award of the LOM. It does not indicate he was awarded a second LOM. 5. His DA Form 66 (Officer Qualification Record), item 21 (Awards and Decorations), shows he was awarded the first LOM under the authority of the Department of the Army General Order (DAGO) 26 of 18 June 1968. 6. There are no orders in his Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) for a second LOM. 7. The LOM certificate the applicant submits indicates he was awarded the second LOM for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding services with Headquarters, United States Army Strategic Communications Command-Europe during the period 1 August 1968 to 1 July 1970. 8. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the LOM is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding services and achievements. The performance must merit recognition of key individuals for service rendered in a clearly exceptional manner. Performance of duties normal to the grade, branch, specialty, or assignment and experience of an individual is not an adequate basis for this award. In peacetime, service should be in the nature of a special requirement or an extremely difficult duty performed in an unprecedented and clearly exceptional manner. However, justification may accrue by virtue of exceptionally meritorious service in a succession of important positions. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. His DA Form 66 does not show he was awarded a second LOM. Although the applicant provides a copy of his LOM certificate which shows it was his second LOM, there are no orders in his MPRJ awarding him a second LOM. Army regulations require that for all personal decorations formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. Notwithstanding this requirement, the evidence is sufficient to show the applicant was awarded the second LOM. It is entirely reasonable for a Soldier of the applicant’s rank to have received an LOM upon retirement, and it is not unprecedented for a retirement award to be issued after the DD Form 214 has been issued. 2. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence to add the second LOM to his DD Form 214. BOARD VOTE: ____X___ ____X___ ____X___ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant recommendation for relief. As a result the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by adding the LOM (2nd Award) to his DD Form 214 for the period ending 31 August 1970. _______ _ 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) AR20120005258 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140010974 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1