IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  8 October 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150003443 


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 military records by showing he was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) and that it was shown on his 
DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty).

2.  The applicant states that at the time of his retirement, his commander told him he had the MSM coming and handed him the medal.  He would like the Board to locate the orders if possible.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 effective 30 September 1975.

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 13 October 1955, the applicant, having had prior military service, enlisted in the Regular Army beginning in the rank of private, pay grade E-2.  He attained the rank of specialist five, pay grade E-5.  On 5 February 1962, he was released from active duty due to the expiration of his term of active duty service.  His DD Form 214 for this period of active duty service shows his awards as:

* Good Conduct Medal
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge (90 millimeter gun)
* Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Machinegun)
* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Pistol and Rifle)

3.  On 6 April 1967, the applicant again enlisted in the Regular Army beginning in the rank of staff sergeant, pay  grade E-6.  On 11 February 1971, he was honorably discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment.  His DD Form 214 for this period of active duty service shows his awards as:

* Good Conduct Medal (three awards)
* Vietnam Service Medal
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal
* Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation

4.  On 12 February 1971, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army.  He was subsequently promoted to platoon sergeant, pay grade E-7 with a date of rank of 29 September 1972.  On 30 September 1975, he was retired due to sufficient length of service.  His DD Form 214 for this period of service shows his awards as:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal
* Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation
* Good Conduct Medal (six awards)
* Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation
* Army Commendation Medal

5.  The applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) shows in Item 9 (Awards, Decorations and Campaigns) the same awards as listed on his DD Forms 214.

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the MSM 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.  After 16 January 1969 but prior to 11 September 2001, the MSM was authorized to be awarded only for meritorious service or achievement while serving in a non-combat area.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

7.  Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) states:

   a.  The ABCMR will decide cases on the evidence of record. It is not an investigative body.
   
   b.  The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity.  The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.
   
8.  Title 10 of the U.S. Code, section 1130 (10 USC 1130) provides the legal authority for consideration of proposals for decorations not previously submitted in timely fashion.  It allows, in effect, that upon the request of a Member of Congress, the Secretary concerned shall review a proposal for the award or presentation of a decoration (or the upgrading of a decoration), either for an individual or a unit, that is not otherwise authorized to be presented or awarded due to limitations established by law or policy for timely submission of a recommendation for such award or presentation.  Based upon such review, the Secretary shall make a determination as to the merits of approving the award or presentation of the decoration.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 for the period ending 30 September 1975 should be corrected to show award of the MSM because he was handed this medal at the time of his retirement.

2.  A review of the applicant’s military personnel records failed to show any general orders awarding him the MSM or other evidence on file in his Official Military Personnel File that confirms award of this personal decoration.

3.  Even though the available evidence is insufficient for awarding the applicant an MSM, this in no way affects his right to pursue his claim for the medal by submitting a request through his Member of Congress under the provisions of 10 USC 1130.

4.  The Board is not sufficiently staffed to perform research in order to provide the appropriate documents necessary to prove an applicant’s contention.  Such action is the applicant’s responsibility.

5.  In view of the above, the applicant’s request should be denied.

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)                                         AR20110020295



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                       AR20150003443



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1