APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his Army Commendation Medal with “V” device be upgraded to the Soldier’s Medal.  He maintains he was originally recommended for the Soldier’s Medal and had the recommendation reached his highest headquarters it would have been approved rather than downgraded.  He submits an expanded version of the events leading to the award as well as a statement of support from an individual who indicates he was the “team leader” at the time of the action in question.  The former team leader notes it was his understanding the applicant had originally been recommended for the Soldier’s Medal.

PURPOSE:  To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He served an initial period of active duty between July 1947 and June 1950.  He then reenlisted in September 1950 and served continuously until his retirement in May 1977.

The applicant’s records indicate he was awarded an Army Commendation Medal with “V” device as a result of his heroic actions (not involving actual conflict with an enemy) on 26 May 1967 while in Thailand and serving in pay grade E-7.  The award citation commends the applicant for diving into a river from a hovering helicopter to rescue a Thai soldier who was struggling to reach the helicopter.  The applicant then remained in the water to assist five other Thai soldiers board the helicopter, including one who panicked and pulled the applicant beneath the water.

The award was confirmed in orders published by the United States Army Support Command in Thailand on 2 August 1967.

Army Regulations 600-8-22, provides in pertinent part, that the Soldier's Medal is awarded for distinguished heroism not involving conflict with the enemy.  The same degree of heroism is required as for award of the Distinguished Flying Cross.  The action must have involved personal danger or hazard and the voluntary risk of life.  However, awards are not to be based solely upon the saving of a life.

The Army Commendation Medal may be awarded for acts of noncombatant-related heroism which do not meet the requirements for an award of the Soldier’s Medal.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 also states it is the responsibility of any individual having personal knowledge of an act, achievement, or service believed to warrant the award of a decoration to submit a formal recommendation into military command channels for consideration within 2 years of the act, achievement, or service to be honored.  The decision to award an individual a decoration and the decision as to which award if appropriate are both subjective decisions made by the commander having award approval authority.  The Army does not condone self-recognition; therefore, a soldier may not recommend himself/herself for award of a decoration.

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.  Failure to file within 3 years may be excused by a correction board if it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so.

DISCUSSION:  The alleged error or injustice was, or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered on 31 May 1977, the date the applicant was released from active duty for the purpose of retirement.  The time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 31 May 1980.

The application is dated 17 May 1996 and the applicant has not explained or otherwise satisfactorily demonstrated by competent evidence that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to apply within the time allotted.

DETERMINATION:  The subject application was not submitted within the time required.  The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient justification to conclude that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the relief requested or to excuse the failure to file within the time prescribed by law.

BOARD VOTE:

                      EXCUSE FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE

                      GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                      CONCUR WITH DETERMINATION

		Karl F. Schneider
		Acting Director