IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  22 June 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090021318 


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 the following corrections be made to his DD Form 215 (Correction to the DD Form 214):

* that item 4 (Mailing address) be corrected to show his current address
* that item 5 (Original DD Form 214 Is Corrected As Indicted Below) show the Legion of Merit (LOM) with (1st Oak Leaf Cluster) vice "20 Oak Leaf Cluster"
* item 7 (Signature Block) be corrected by adding a signature

2.  The applicant states the address in item 4 of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), issued on 30 September 1993 should be changed to show the address he provides.  He also claims the LOM in item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) should show the LOM with (1st Oak Leaf Cluster) instead of (2nd Oak Leaf Cluster).  He also states the DD Form 215 he was issued is missing the signature authority.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application:

* Self- Authored Letter dated 17 January 2009
* DD Form 214 dated 30 September 1993
* LOM Certificates dated 22 July 1987 and 30 February 1994
* DD Form 215 dated 13 January 2000


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.  On 30 September 1993, he was honorably retired, in the rank of colonel, after completing 25 years, 4 months, and 13 days of active military service.  Item 7b (Home of Record) and item 19a (Mailing Address After Separation) of the 30 September 1993 DD Form 214 both contain the address shown in item 3 of the DD Form 215 he was issued on 13 January 2000.  

3.  Item 13 of the applicant's 30 September 1993 DD Form 214 shows he earned the following awards during his active duty tenure:

* LOM
* Meritorious Service Medal (MSM)
* Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) 1st Oak Leaf Cluster
* Army Achievement Medal (AAM) 2nd Oak Leaf Cluster
* National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) with service star
* Southwest Asia Service Medal (SWASM) with 3 bronze service stars
* Kuwait Liberation Medal-Saudi Arabia (KLM-SA)
* Armed Forces Reserve Medal (AFRM)
* Army Service Ribbon (ASR)
* Overseas Service Ribbon (OSR) 

4.  On 3 February 1994, the applicant was awarded a second LOM for the period 10 August 1988 through 30 September 1993 as his retirement award.

5.  On 13 January 2000, the applicant was issued a DD Form 215 that erroneously corrected item 13 of his 1993 DD Form 214 to show the LOM (20 Oak Leaf Cluster), and the KLM-SA.  This DD Form 215 also appropriately corrected his DD Form 214 to show the KLM-KU.  The mailing address listed in item 4 of the DD Form 215 is consistent with the mailing address the applicant gave at the time of separation.  Item 7 of the DD Form 215 contains the typed signature block of The Adjutant General but contains no signature.  

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) contains the Army's awards policy.  Paragraph 6-3 contains guidance on Oak Leaf Clusters.  It states an Oak Leaf Cluster is issued to denote award of second and succeeding awards of decorations other than the Air Medal, which includes the LOM.  

7.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge, release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army.  It also establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  Chapter 2 contains preparation instructions for the DD Form 214.  The instructions for item 13 state to enter all awards earned during military service. 

8.  Paragraph 2-6 of the separation documents regulation contains guidance on alterations and corrections of the DD Form 214.  It stipulates corrections are not authorized in items 1, 3, 4, 12, and 18-30 of the DD Form 214 or to items 1, 3, 5, and 7 of the DD Form 215. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that the DD Form 215 he was issued should be corrected to show a new mailing address in item 4 and that a signature should be entered in item 7 has been carefully considered and found to have merit.  By regulation, the DD Form 215, item 4 can be changed to reflect the current mailing address and item 7 should contain the signature of an authorized official.  

2.  The evidence of record further shows the applicant was awarded a second LOM for the period 10 August 1988 through 30 September 1993, upon retirement.  The DD Form 215 he was issued erroneously listed the award as the LOM (20 Oak Leaf Cluster).  By regulation, an Oak Leaf Cluster is issued to denote a second and succeeding award of the LOM.  As a result, the applicant's DD Form 214 should have been corrected to show the LOM 1st Oak Leaf Cluster, denoting two awards of the LOM.  

3.  In addition, the signature of the official listed in item 7 of his DD Form 215 cannot be obtained at this late date.  However, the current DD Form 215 can be voided and a new DD Form 215 can be issued to correct his 1993 DD Form 214 and it will contain the signature of an authorized official. 

4.  The applicant is advised the new DD Form 215 will not list the KLM-SA since it is already listed in item 13 of his 1993 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 a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  voiding the 13 January 2000 DD Form 215;

	b.  issuing the applicant a DD Form 215 that corrects item 13 of his 1993 DD Form 214 to show his current mailing address in item 4;

	c.  amending item 13 of his 1993 DD Form 214 by deleting the Legion of Merit and adding the Legion of Merit 1st Oak Leaf Cluster (2nd Award); and KLM-KU; and 

	d.  completing item 7 by showing the signature of an authorized official. 



      ____________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)                                         AR20090021318



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090021318



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1