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 applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants 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
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018428
The applicant requests reconsideration of the Boards 21 October 2008 decision to deny his request to correct his records to show award of three Army Commendation Medals (Army Commendation Medal with second Oak Leaf Cluster), a second Army Good Conduct Medal, and qualification as an expert with the pistol, machinegun, and hand grenade. Documents associated with the applicants final award of the Army Commendation, which was originally recommended as a Meritorious Service Medal, is new...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084708C070212
d. Based on the foregoing, the Chief of the Military Awards Branch recommended that the applicant's request should be denied, that he should receive the Army Commendation Medal (First Oak Leaf Cluster) approved by the Commanding General of the 5th Signal Command on 9 May 2002, and that the applicant's servicing personnel center should correct his official records to show this award. COL R, as the Chief of Staff and Headquarters Commandant of the 5th Signal Command at that time, indicated in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067085C070402
However, evidence of record shows the applicant received an award of the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious service for the period 20 July 1972 to 28 March 1973 which in accordance with the regulation supercedes the Bronze Star Medal awarded during the same period for achievement. The applicant has not presented compelling evidence or argument which warrants restoration of the two Bronze Star Medals revoked by Department of the Army Letter Orders – Amendment and Revocation of Orders, dated...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014197
His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) does not show the duty MOS in which he served while assigned to Company B, 2nd Battalion, 502d Infantry in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) during the period 12 July to 18 August 1967. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Military Awards), in effect at the time, provided that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded to individuals who completed a qualified period of active duty enlisted service. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016048
After cancelling his orders they revoked that PCS award because he was there for another year. On 16 April 2009, DISA published Military Personnel Awards Orders Number 2009-043 awarding the applicant the DMSM for meritorious service from 12 December 2003 to 21 July 2009, by reason of "PCS." The original order (2009-043) awarding him the DMSM (2009-043) is not filed in his OMPF; however, the revocation order (2009-107) is filed in the performance folder of his OMPF.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040001259C070208
The applicant's certificate for award of the MSM shows he distinguished himself by exceptionally meritorious service while assigned as a member of he United States Army Security Agency. One OSB is authorized for each period of 6 months active Federal service as a member of a U.S. Service in Vietnam from 1 July 1958 to 28 March 1973. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing award of the MSM, two OSB's and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040005951C070208
Item 38 of his DA Form 20 (and item 35 of his DA Form 2-1) shows he was assigned to L Troop, 3d Squadron, 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment on 15 November 1967 and performed duties as an 11D40 Senior Radar Operator. The Bronze Star Medal orders show the applicant's rank as SP5, an Article 15 he received on 2 May 1969 shows his rank as SP5, and he signed a DA Form 20 on 14 July 1970 and audited it on 21 March 1974 knowing it showed he was promoted to SP5 on 12 February 1968. Records show the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050016029C070206
On the date of his discharge, the applicant had completed 2 years and 6 months total active military service, with 125 days lost due to absence without leave and confinement. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Records show the applicant exhausted his administrative remedies in this case when his case was last reviewed by the ADRB on 16 March 1977.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070008328
On 4 October 2005, a PEB convened at Fort Lewis, Washington, and found the applicant's medical condition of chronic radiating low back pain prevented him from performing his duties. On 12 April 2006, the applicant was issued a third permanent physical profile (P2) for low back pain by the Physical Medicine Clinic, William Beaumont Army Medical Center, Fort Bliss, Texas. Only after the Physical Disability Agency recommended a 10 percent disability, did the applicant pursue a new and less...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064619C070421
He states that his dates of service on his 1984 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) are incorrect. The applicant's existing military personnel file, which appears to have been created in 1987 when he returned to active duty for a third time, also contains a DD Form 214 reflecting a period of active duty between 2 June 1977 and 1 September 1984. The evidence suggests the applicant likely was discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment on 1 June 1977...