IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 3 May 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100026198 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, correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 4 September 1990 to show award of the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) and the Army Achievement Medal (AAM). 2. The applicant states: * he was awarded the ARCOM on 13 September 1990 * he was awarded the AAM in 1994 while he was in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) 3. The applicant provides: * an ARCOM award certificate * an AAM award certificate 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 October 1986. He completed his training and he was awarded military occupational specialty 96D (imagery analyst). On 4 September 1990, he was honorably released from active duty under the early transition program and he was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) to complete his remaining service obligation. 3. Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 does not show the ARCOM or AAM as authorized awards. 4. He provided an ARCOM award certificate for meritorious service during the period 8 July 1987 to 21 October 1990, dated 13 September 1990. However, there are no orders for the ARCOM in the available records. 5. He provided an AAM award certificate for meritorious achievement during the period 18 July to 26 August 1994, dated 27 August 1994. It shows he was awarded the AAM by Permanent Orders 41-10, dated 27 August 1994. 6. He was honorably discharged from the USAR on 6 November 2003. 7. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the ARCOM may be awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the Army after 6 December 1941, distinguishes himself or herself by heroism, meritorious achievement, or meritorious service. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. 8. Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the AAM is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States, who while serving in a noncombat area on or after 1 August 1981, distinguished themselves by meritorious service or achievement. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. 9. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army. It establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214. In pertinent part it states that the DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier’s most recent period of continuous active duty. It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. There are no orders for the ARCOM in the available records and the applicant did not provide any orders for the ARCOM. In the absence of orders officially awarding him the ARCOM or any other official corroborating evidence, the award certificate provided by the applicant is not sufficient in itself as a basis for adding the ARCOM to his DD Form 214 for the period ending 4 September 1990. 2. The DD Form 214 is a "snapshot in time" and is a reflection of the applicant's record of active Army service at the time of his release from active duty. Orders show he received the AAM in 1994, four years after his release from active duty. Therefore, there is no basis for granting his request to show this medal on his DD Form 214 for the period ending 4 September 1990. 3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief. 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) AR20100026198 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100026198 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1