IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 June 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140019075 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 reconsideration of his earlier request to correct his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) by showing he was awarded the Army Achievement Medal (AAM) with Oak Leaf Cluster (OLC). 2. The applicant states he submitted a request for an update of all awards that he felt were left off of his DD Form 214. He received an updated DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214), but it did not include an OLC for his AAM. He received these two AAMs while in Iraq. He mailed full color copies of both AAMs to support his original request. He is entitled to an OLC on his AAM and wants it designated on his DD Form 214. If necessary, he can submit copies of both documents again to show he was twice awarded the AAM while in Iraq. He thinks the Board did a great and prompt job replying to and reviewing his issues. He also thinks that because he submitted so much to look at this OLC was just overlooked. As his DD Form 215 displays, he had quite a bit updated. He sends this request because he wants it official that he is entitled to an OLC for his AAM. 3. The applicant provides * DA Form 4980-18 (Certificate for AAM) dated 20 June 1991 * DA Form 4980, dated 17 September 1991 * Letter from Army Review Boards Agency, dated 17 October 2014 * DD Form 215, dated 22 October 2014 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20140002034, on 11 September 2014. 2. The applicant has provided copies of two award certificates, one of which appears to be new evidence that requires consideration by the Board. 3. The original Record of Proceedings (ROP) shows that the Board considered the applicant’s request to show two awards of the AAM on his DD Form 214. The Board determined from the available evidence that two different commanders had apparently awarded the applicant an AAM for essentially the same period of service. Because orders were only provided for one of the two awards and it appeared that a second AAM had been awarded for the same service as the first award, the Board denied the applicant’s request to show both awards on his DD Form 214. 4. The DA Form 4980, dated 20 June 1991, as provided by the applicant, shows he was awarded the AAM for meritorious service during the period 20 March through 5 May 1991. He was recognized for participating in the refugee relief effort of Safwan, Iraq. 5. The DA Form 4980, dated 17 September 1991, as provided by the applicant, shows he was awarded the AAM for meritorious service during the period 24 March through 6 May 1991. He was recognized for providing support to refugees and citizens of Safwan, Iraq. 6. 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. The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected by showing he was awarded the AAM with OLC. 2. The available evidence strongly indicates that two separate commanders processed personnel actions to award the applicant the AAM for essentially the same period of military service, doing essentially the same performance of duty. The governing regulation clearly states that an individual may not receive more than one decoration for the same act or period of service. 3. In view of the foregoing, , there is an insuffiencent evidentiary 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20140002034, dated 11 September 2014. _______ _ _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) AR20140019075 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140019075 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1