IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  11 May 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090018387 


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 he be awarded the Soldier's Medal.

2.  The applicant states that he met the regulatory criteria for the Soldier's Medal.  He adds that others have been awarded the Soldier's Medal for the exact same actions he took.

3.  The applicant provides:
 
* his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty)
* two letters he sent to the Human Resources Command Alexandria 
dated 10 December 2001 and 11 February 2009
* his Department of Veterans Affairs Disability Rating Decision
* a letter to his elected representative

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's military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 November 1974, was awarded the military occupational specialty of military policeman, and was promoted to pay grade E-4.

3.  On 10 July 1975, the applicant was given a Certificate of Achievement for "his singularly outstanding performance of duty on 2 July 1975 while serving as a military policeman with the New York Area Command and Fort Hamilton.  At 0900 hours on 2 July, [the applicant] responded to a fire alarm at the off-post family housing complex of Dayton Manor.  Upon arrival, he learned that the fire was spreading from an apartment occupied by two small and unattended children.  Without hesitation and regard for his personal safety, [the applicant] raced into the building to rescue these children.  Finding the apartment empty but engulfed in flames and thick smoke, he quickly began a door by door search to evacuate the occupants from the other apartments.  Although subsequently overcome by smoke, his quick reaction and unselfish concern for the personal safety of others permitted a complete evacuation of the building without any serious injuries to the dependents."

4.  On 13 January 1977, the applicant was honorably discharged for personal drug abuse.

5.  On 1 March 2001, the Awards Board denied the applicant's request for a Soldier's Medal.  The Awards Board determined that the degree of action and service rendered did not meet the strict criteria for the award, and affirmed that the Certificate of Achievement was the appropriate award for his actions.

6.  On 10 December 2001, the applicant appealed that denial.  In that appeal he likened his experience for which he received the Certificate of Achievement to the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center on 11 September 2001.  The response to that appeal is not a matter of record.

7.  On 11 February 2009, the applicant again appealed the denial of his request for the Soldier's Medal.  In that appeal he chronicled the origin and history of the Soldier's Medal and cited numerous instances where a Soldier was awarded the Soldier's Medal for saving people in fires.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Soldier's Medal is awarded for distinguished heroism not involving actual conflict with the enemy. The same degree of heroism is required for award of the Distinguished Flying Cross.  The performance must have involved personal hazard or danger and the voluntary risk of life under conditions not involving conflict with an armed enemy. Awards of the Soldier’s Medal will not be made solely on the basis of having saved a life.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request for the Soldier's Medal must be viewed in the light of the level of heroism he displayed for the action in question.

2.  In combat, there are levels of awards for heroism which are listed in ascending order

* Army Commendation Medal for Valor
* Air Medal for Valor
* Bronze Star for Valor
* Distinguished Flying Cross
* Silver Star
* Distinguished Service Cross
* Medal of Honor

3.  When the applicant performed the action for which he was given the Certificate of Achievement, the only authorized award for non-combat related heroism was the Soldier's Medal, which is reserved for a level of heroism required for the award of the Distinguished Flying Cross (which is a higher award than the Bronze Star for Valor).

4.  In the 1 March 2001 denial of the Soldiers Medal, the Awards Branch stated the degree of applicant's action and service did not meet the strict criteria for the award, and affirmed that the Certificate of Achievement was the appropriate award for his actions.  In other words, the Awards Board informed the applicant that the level of heroism displayed was insufficient to warrant award of the Soldier's Medal.

5.  While other Soldiers have undoubtedly been awarded the Soldier's Medal for heroism for fire related actions, the risk they took would be the primary factor used in determining their eligibility for that award.  Did they pull a white-hot girder off a person (thereby sustaining 2nd degree burns) while the building was collapsing around them?  Such action would certainly be viewed differently than banging on doors to warn people in a smoke filled building.

6.  The applicant has not submitted any evidence that he displayed the level of heroism required for award of the Soldier's Medal.  As such, there is no basis to grant his request.
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)                                         AR20090018387



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090018387



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1