IN THE CASE OF:	 

		BOARD DATE:	30 September 2008  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080007791 


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, award of the Meritorious Service Medal and its addition to his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).   

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was advised that he would be awarded the Meritorious Service Medal at the time of his retirement.  He also states, in effect, that he was also advised that if the award had not been completed by the time he retired, it would be forwarded to him once it was completed.  He called several times after he retired, but he could not find anyone to give him the status. After all this time, he still feels that after 20 plus years some recognition is due.   

3.  The applicant further states he entered active duty in July 1972 and retired in February 1994, never received an Article 15, was Soldier of the Year in 1984, and had nothing negative in his record in all that time.  He never heard of anyone retiring without some recognition and he feels cheated.  He is still proud of his service and he is still Army.  Somewhere there should be some record of his service and possibly this award.

4.  The applicant provides no additional documentary evidence in support of his application.





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 29 March 1983, with prior enlisted service, and served continuously through several reenlistments.   

3.  The applicant’s records contain a DA Form 638-1 (Recommendation for Award of (For Other Than Valor) Army Achievement Medal, Army Commendation Medal, and Meritorious Service Medal), dated 2 March 1983.  The form shows the applicant was recommended for award of the Meritorious Service Medal for the period October 1988 to January 1993.  In April 1993, this award was downgraded to the Army Commendation Medal.  The award of the Army Commendation Medal, with second Oak Leaf Cluster, was approved on 7 June 1993.  This award is listed on the applicant’s DD Form 214.

4.  The applicant’s records also contain a DA Form 638-1, dated 6 April 1993.  The form shows the applicant was recommended for award of the Army Commendation Medal, with second Oak Leaf Cluster, for the period 24 January 1993 to 15 April 1993.  On 6 April 1993, this award was downgraded to the Army Achievement Medal.  The award of the Army Achievement Medal was approved on 12 April 1993.  This award is listed on the applicant’s DD Form 214.

5.  The applicant was honorably discharged from active duty on 28 February 1994, by reason of voluntary early retirement, and placed on the retired list on 1 March 1994.  He was credited with 19 years, 6 months, and 17 days total active service.

6.  Entries on the applicant's DD Form 214, Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) list the following awards:  the Army Commendation Medal, with 2nd Oak Leaf Cluster; the Army Achievement 

Medal, with 2nd Oak Leaf Cluster; the Good Conduct Medal (5th Award); the National Defense Service Medal (2nd Award); the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal; the Humanitarian Service Medal (2nd Award); the Non-Commissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon, with Numeral 3; the Army Service Ribbon; the Overseas Service Ribbon, with Numeral 2; the Army Superior Unit Award; the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge, with Pistol Bar (.45 caliber); the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge, with Pistol Bar (9 mm); the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge, with Rifle Bar (M-16); the Senior Explosive Ordnance Disposal Badge; and the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Badge. 

7.  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.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to award of the Meritorious Service Medal and its addition to his DD Form 214.  The evidence shows the applicant's recommendation for award of the Meritorious Service Medal was downgraded to the Army Commendation Medal, with second Oak Leaf Cluster, prior to his retirement.  There is no evidence that award of the Meritorious Service Medal was reinstated or recommended again prior to his discharge.  In accordance with regulatory guidance, there is no automatic entitlement to any award, to include the Meritorious Service Medal, upon reassignment, release, or discharge from the service.

2.  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.

3.  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)                                         AR20080007791



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080007791


2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1