IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 8 April 2021 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20200000127 APPLICANT REQUESTS: * an upgrade of his award of the Silver Star to a Medal of Honor * a personal appearance before the Board APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Letter to Secretary of the Army from Brigadier General (BG) JCB (Retired) * Letter of Authority from the Applicant, 27 November 2016 * Official Request to the Applicant’s Senator, 1 April 2009 * Historical Background on Enemy Situation * Overview of Events at Landing Zone (LZ) XRAY (Operation) * Trail of Medal of Honor Award Requests for Major (MAJ)/Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) BPC and Captain (CPT) EWF * Justification and Reasoning for Upgrade Silver Star Update Request * Map of South Vietnam * Sketch of North Vietnam * Photograph of the Operational Summary of the "Battle of la Drang" * Overhead View and Vegetation Surrounding "la Drang" Valley * Sketch of LZ XRAY and Close Range Photograph * Photograph of the Applicant * Map of the Operational Area and Terrain Features * Outline of the Flight Route * Transcript of Oral Operations Orders issued by LTC HGM (a.k.a. Lieutenant General (LTG) (Retired)), 14 November 1965 * Photograph of the Firing Positions, an Aircraft Approaching, Dismounting Soldiers, and Terrain with Soldiers * After Action Report (AAR) of the Battle of LZ XRAY and Schematic * Two Excerpts from “We Were Soldiers Once,” page 142 and pages 115-139 * AAR, Ia Drang Valley Operation – 16 November 1965 * 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile) Combat Operations AAR, Pleiku Campaign, 23 October 1965 to 26 November 1965 * General Orders Number 2XX (Distinguished Flying Cross), 20 January 19XX (Awarded to MAJ/LTC BPC) * General Orders Number 8XX (Distinguished Flying Cross), 23 March 19X (Awarded to CPT EWF) * General Orders Number 5XX (Distinguished Flying Cross), 27 February 19XX (Awarded to Applicant) * Permanent Orders 3XX-8 (Distinguished Service Cross), 17 November 19XX (Awarded to CPT EWF) * Letter to MAJ/LTC BPC from the Military Awards Branch, 17 November 19XX * Permanent Order 2XX-05 (Distinguished Service Cross), 20 October 19XX (Awarded to MAJ/LTC BPC) * Permanent Orders XX-2 (Silver Star), 27 March 19XX (Awarded to Applicant) * General Orders Number XX (Medal of Honor) (Awarded to CPT EWF) * General Orders Number 2XXX-07 (Medal of Honor) (Awarded to MAJ/LTC BPC) * Two DA Forms 759 (Individual Flight Record – Army Aviator), July to October 1965 (Applicant) (CPT JM) * Two Fly Charts (Applicant) (MAJ/LTC BCP) * Foot Notes (Documenting Flight Data for Applicant) * 1st Indorsement from LTC/LTG HGM, 24 October 1988 * Letter to U.S. News and World Report from MAJ DHH, 26 October 1990 * Endorsement of Medal of Honor Award for MAJ/LTC BPC, 12 August 1991 * Postcard Written to the Applicant from LTC/LTG HGM, 8 September 1991 * Letter to Applicant from LTC/LTG HGM, 21 September 1992 * Inscribed Photograph of LTC/LTG HGM to Applicant * Letter from LTC JDC, 14 May 2000 * Letter from Colonel (COL) RAN, 17 August 1993 * DA Form 67-5 (U.S. Army Officer Efficiency Report), 15 September 1965 to 9 June 1965 * DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award) (Distinguished Service Cross) for the Applicant, 15 November 1994 and supporting documentation * Letter from LTC/LTG HGM to the Chief of Staff of the Army, 18 November 1994 * Recommendation for Award (Distinguished Service Cross) for the Applicant, 1 March 1996, with supporting documentation * Memorandum from MAJ/LTC BPC to the Applicant, October 1996 * Excerpt from a Letter to the Applicant from MAJ/LTC BPC * Four Letters from CW4 WS, 11 November 1999, 3 September 2000, 16 February 2006, and 24 June 2008 * Letter from LTC/LTG HGM, 29 January 2003 * Statement from KND, 4 March 2003 * Recommendation for Award (Medal of Honor) for the Applicant, 15 April 2003 * Recommendation for Award (Medal of Honor) for the Applicant, 7 April 2006 * Letter from CW4 LCK, 8 August 2006 * Statement from CPT/MAJ EWF * Statement by Private First Class (PFC) WW, 4 December 2006 * Recommendation for Award Reverse of DA Form 638 for the Applicant (Downgrade Recommendation), 11 November 2007 * Statement from LTC RLS, 1 May 2007 * Record of Army Decorations Board Action for the Applicant’s Medal of Honor, 4 April 2008 with supporting documentation * Recommendations from LTG CWB, 4 April 2008, LTC JHC, 6 December 2008, LTG TNG, 28 March 2008, LTG JFW, 31 March 2008, LTG JWW, 17 April 2008 * Recommendation for Award (Medal of Honor) for the Applicant, 24 November 2008 * Letter and Endorsement from Staff Sergeant (SSG) KOM, 9 January 2009 * Letter from PFC RB, 20 January 2009 * Recommendation for Award (Medal of Honor) for CW4 LCK, 18 June 2002 and 13 April 2012 * Letter from CPT RK, 29 January 2007 * Statement by BB, 11 April 2001 * Statement by RRB * Statement by MAJ DHH, 10 January 2007 * Excerpt from “Chopper” * Interview Transcripts from CPT/MAJ EWF, GR, KD, CW4 LCK, and Applicant * Letter to Honorable John Warner from Military Awards Branch, 20 December 2004 and to the Applicant, 27 December 2007 and 27 February 2008 * U.S. Army Medical Statistics by Conflict, Operation or Incident * The Adjutant General Directorate Awards and Decorations Statistics by Conflict * Memorandum from the Secretary of Defense, subject: Comprehensive Military Decorations and Awards Review, 20 March 2014 * USA Today Article, “Pentagon May Upgrade Hundreds of Troops to Possible Medals of Honor,” 6 January 2016 * Article, Defense Department Announces Service Cross and Silver Star Review, 7 January 2016 * Article, Changes to Military Decorations and Awards Program, 7 January 2016 * Citation, Distinguished Service Cross, MAJ CSK * Citation, Medal of Honor, MAJ CSK, MAJ WEA, MAJ PHB, CWO FEF, CPT EWF, CWO MJN, and CPT JES * Statement from General (GEN) JWN to the Secretary of the Army, 15 May 2019 * Record of Army Decorations Board Action for the Applicant’s Medal of Honor, 19 April 2019 with Statements from LTG AG, MG LS, MG CM, Brigadier General (BG) JWN, COL AD, and LTC LS FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three-year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code, section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states the initial award of the Distinguished Flying Cross was later upgraded to the Silver Star is flawed by incorrect information and errors of omission. These factors prevented fair and impartial consideration of proper recognition and unjustly resulted in a lesser award for the applicant than two officers whose awards were upgraded to the Distinguished Service Cross and then to the Medal of Honor. It has taken over 15 years to conduct research, find eyewitnesses, and gather evidence which definitely proves that the applicant should have been considered for the Medal of Honor along with CPT/MAJ BPC and CPT/MAJ EWF. The applicant should be awarded the Medal of Honor for his extraordinary heroism as an Army aviator on 14 November 1965 at LZ XRAY in the former Republic of South Vietnam. a. MAJ EWF (Retired) was presented the Medal of Honor at a White House ceremony conducted on 16 July 2002. MAJ/LTC BPC (Retired) was awarded the Medal of Honor at a ceremony in the White House on 26 February 2007. Both of these awards of the Medal of Honor recognized the extraordinary heroism above and beyond the call of duty by the MAJ BPC and then CPT EWF, who as Army aviators flew helicopter missions in support of combat operations of the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry at LZ XRAY on 14 November 1965 in the Republic of South Vietnam. b. During helicopter operations into LZ XRAY on 14 November 1965, MAJ/LTC BPC commanded Company A, 229th Assault Helicopter Battalion. The applicant commanded a section of four helicopters from Company B, 229th Assault Helicopter Battalion placed under the operational control of MAJ/LTC BPC to increase the number of helicopters. c. Evidence conclusively shows that the applicant flew the same missions and flight paths as MAJ/LTC BPC and CPT EWF on 14 November 1965 during pick up and insertion of Soldiers into LZ XRAY. However, evidence also proves that the applicant flew several extremely heroic and high risk of death missions independently of MAJ/LTC BPC and CPT EWF to deliver ammunition, water, and medical supplies and to retrieve his wingman’s helicopter crew and wounded Soldiers from enemy held territory just outside LZ XRAY. d. The applicant was exposed to the same or greater risk of death and performed the same or greater degree of heroism as MAJ/LTC BPC and CPT EWF. 3. The applicant provides: a. A letter to the Secretary of the Army from BG JCB (Retired), serving as an interested party trusted by the applicant to assist him in submitting his request for an upgrade of his Silver Star to the Medal of Honor, which states: (1) He is requesting to upgrade the Silver Star awarded to the applicant on 27 March 1997. On this date, the Department of the Army upgraded the Distinguished Flying Cross previously awarded to the applicant on 27 February 1966 for his heroic actions in support of the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry at LZ XRAY on 14 November 1965. (2) In 2008, BG JCB participated with five other retired Army general officers in review of a previous submission requesting an upgrade of the Silver Star awarded to the applicant to the Medal of Honor. All six of them independently reviewed the evidence and unanimously agreed that the applicant’s actions merited award of the Medal of Honor. It was not favorably considered by the Army Decorations Board. The Silver Star remains tainted by errors and omission of critical facts resulting in the inadequate recognition of the applicant’s heroism. (3) In the intervening years since the first review, BG JCB has remained steadfastly committed to presenting evidence to correct inadequacies that for over 53 years have denied the applicant proper and deserved recognition for his heroic actions at LZ XRAY. The applicant clearly demonstrated unparalleled conspicuous gallantry, risk of life, and intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty and unquestionably distinguished himself above all of his fellow aviators at LZ XRAY on 14 November 1965 and the award of the Silver Star does not begin to recognize the depth of his heroism or the importance of his actions to the men of his unit. (4) BG JCB’s pursuit of justice for the applicant is not a personal whim. Obtaining award of the Medal of Honor for the applicant is motivated by and solidly grounded on the facts contained in eyewitness statements and award recommendations prepared by officers, warrant officers, and enlisted men serving with the applicant. These men include: * LTG HWK, division commander * LTC/LTG HGM, battalion commander * LTC BCP, aviation unit flight leader * CW4 WS, pilot * CW4 LCK, pilot * CWO HH, pilot * CWO KD, pilot * SSG KM, door gunner * PFC RB, door gunner * PFC WW, door gunner * PFC RA, door gunner (5) In 2015, BG JCB initiated this latest attempt to right the wrong inflicted on the applicant. New evidence presents facts which correct errors and omissions in award of the applicant’s Silver Star. Substantial new evidence proves conclusively that the applicant took the first and unprecedented action at great personal risk of death to fly ammunition to the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry which was decisively engaged by over 1200 North Vietnamese soldiers. This self-initiated act ultimately prevented annihilation. (6) Further, new statements by eyewitnesses verify in detail that the applicant demonstrated the supreme act of heroism when his wingman was shot down and crashed outside the defensive perimeter of LZ XRAY. The applicant turned his helicopter around and flew back through devastating enemy fire to land next to the burning helicopter where he rescued wounded Soldiers, a passenger, and the helicopter crew as enemy soldiers attacked to kill or capture them. (7) New evidence from eyewitnesses describe in detail three more flights that the applicant made through in LTC/LTG HGM’s words the “hell fire” at LZ XRAY to deliver ammunition, water, and medical supplies and to evacuate at least a dozen more badly wounded Soldiers. Evidence confirms the applicant delivered Soldiers from Company B, 2nd Battalion, 7th Cavalry to reinforce the unit at LZ XRAY, he came under fire from an enemy force which was attacking through a gap in the defense. b. A letter signed by the applicant, dated 27 November 2016, which authorizes BG JCB (Retired) to research, document, prepare, sign, and submit an application to the ABCMR. c. An official request to the applicant’s Senator, dated 1 April 2009, which requests assistance from the Senator’s office in submitting an application to upgrade the applicant’s Silver Star to the Medal of Honor. d. A map of South Vietnam, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, Pleiku Province and its proximity to the Cambodian border which is the area in which the first major battles between U.S. forces, namely the 1st Cavalry Division and major North Vietnam Army units were fought. e. A sketch map, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, the incursion routes for North Vietnamese forces in South Vietnam. The 1st Cavalry Division located its units to block the movement of North Vietnamese Army units into South Vietnam and specifically into Pleiku Province. f. An operational summary map of the Battle of IA Drang, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant: * la Drang River which flowed near LZ XRAY into Cambodia * la Tae River where the first encounter with North Vietnamese Army forces occurred on 1 November 1965 when the 1st Squadron, 9th Cavalry with Company A, 2nd Battalion, 7th Cavalry overran a major enemy medical facility and logistics complex * Pleiku and Plei Me and LZ Victor, which are key points of reference in this case * Army Field Artillery firing positions which supported the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry at LZ XRAY g. An overhead view of the la Drang Valley and the terrain and vegetation near LZ XRAY. h. A photograph showing the vegetation surrounding la Drang in vicinity of LZ XRAY, primarily elephant grass, trees, and heavy undergrowth. i. A sketch, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, the distances between all of the key landing zones and the key military installations in the vicinity of Pleiku and Plei Me. j. A photograph presumably of the applicant assigned as a section flight leader in Company B, 229th Assault Aviation Battalion standing next to his aircraft. k. A map, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, the operational area with key towns and military locations. l. A schematic, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, LZ XRAY and describing terrain features of the area and an aerial view of the clearing which was named LZ XRAY. m. A photograph, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, a close range view of LZ XRAY. n. A schematic, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, flight route taken during the early morning reconnaissance of the operational area by LTC/LTG HGM and his key staff. o. Transcript of Oral Operations Orders issued by LTC/LTG HGM, 14 November 19XX for the operation into LZ XRAY. p. A photograph, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, the firing positions at LZ Falcon which provided artillery support to LZ XRAY. q. A photograph, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, an aircraft approaching and showing the density of the smoke and the vegetation around the LZ. r. A photograph, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, Soldiers dismounting helicopters at LZ XRAY on 14 November 1965. s. A photograph, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, Soldiers dismounting and the nature of the terrain at LZ XRAY. t. A schematic, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, the AAR of the Battle of LZ XRAY. u. Page 142 from the book “We Were Soldiers Once…and Young,” wherein LTC/LTG HGM recounted the toll of the fighting on 14 November 1965. v. A schematic, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, the cross country movement of 2nd Battalion, 5th Cavalry from the vicinity of LZ Falcon to reinforce and subsequently relieve the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry at LZ XRAY on 15 November 1965. w. The AAR on the Battle of LZ XRAY written by LTC/LTG HGM, dated 9 December 1965. x. An excerpt from the 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile) Combat Operations AAR, Pleiku Campaign, 23 October 1965 to 26 November 1965, showing in pertinent part as outlined by the applicant, the intelligence and operational summary for the Battle at LZ XRAY. y. Pages 115 through 128 from the book “We Were Soldiers Once… and Young.” z. General Orders Number 2XX, dated 20 January 19XX, which awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross to MAJ/LTC BPC for heroism while participating in aerial flight on 14 November 1965. aa. General Orders Number 8XX, dated 23 March 19XX, which awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross to CPT EWF for heroism while participating in aerial flight on 14 November 1965. bb. General Orders Number 5XX, dated 27 February 19XX, which awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross to the applicant for heroism while participating in aerial flight on 14 November 1965. cc. Permanent Orders XXX1-8, dated 17 November 19XX, which awarded the Distinguished Service Cross to CPT EWF for extraordinary heroism on 14 November 1965. dd. Letter to MAJ/LTC BPC from the Military Awards Branch, dated 17 November 1997, which states: (1) Thank you for your letter concerning an award recommendation pertaining to CPT EWF. The recommendation for an award of the Medal of Honor was accepted within the provisions of Section 522, Public Law 104-106. (2) The award recommendation was forwarded for review and consideration by the Senior Army Decorations Board which convened on 1 April 1997. On behalf of the Secretary of the Army, the Board determined that the degree of heroism does not meet the criteria for the proposed award. Therefore, the Chief of Staff, United States Army, on behalf of the Secretary of the Army, and combined with the recommendation of the Senior Army Decorations Board, has approved an award of the Distinguished Service Cross. ee. Permanent Order 2XX-05, dated 20 October 19XX, which awarded the Distinguished Service Cross to MAJ/LTC BPC for heroism while participating in aerial flight on 14 November 1965. ff. Permanent Orders XX-2, dated 27 March 1997, which awarded the applicant the Silver Star for gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States on 14 November 1965. The citation for the upgraded award reads: While participating in aerial flight. [Applicant], assigned to Company A, 5th Infantry Regiment, 229th Assault Helicopter Battalion, 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile), United States Army, Vietnam, distinguished himself at Landing Zone X-RAY, in the la Drang valley, Republic of Vietnam on 14 November 1965. On this date, serving as Section Commander of 4 UH-ID helicopters in support of the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment who was engaged in mortal combat with an estimated 2 North Vietnamese regiments. He led his section on 10 sorties into a very hostile and intense battle area under the most extreme and perilous conditions. He evacuated 12 seriously wounded soldiers. His intrepidity was conspicuous when due to the urgency of the situation, he switched aircraft and voluntarily led a flight of 2 back to the battle area to an emergency Landing Zone that had been hastily prepared by the ground commander. Upon departure from this sortie, his trail helicopter was hit by enemy fire, he unhesitant, with utter disregard for his own safety, returned to the downed helicopter, extracted its crew of 4 and an additional 6 wounded who were on board. [Applicant] consistently displayed acts of personal bravery so conspicuous that he incontestably stood above his comrades with extraordinary merit. Each of his 10 sorties was accomplished under extremely perilous conditions. His gallantry and high degree of heroism coupled with his selfless acts and intrepidity are in keeping with the highest traditions of military service and reflect great credit on himself, his unit, and the United States Army. gg. General Orders Number 1XX, dated 31 December 20XX, which awarded the Medal of Honor to CPT EWF for distinguishing himself by numerous acts of conspicuous gallantry and extraordinary intrepidity on 14 November 1965. hh. General Orders Number 20XX-07, dated 17 June 20XX, which awarded the Medal of Honor to MAJ/LTC BPC for distinguishing himself by extraordinary heroism as a flight commander in the Republic of Vietnam on 14 November 1965. ii. The applicant’s individual flight record from July to October 1965, which shows the dates, hours, and missions the applicant flew during that time period. jj. The individual flight record of CPT JM from November 1965 to January 1966, which shows the dates, hours, and missions that he flew during that time period. kk. The applicant’s fly chart for 14 November 1965, which shows the details of the flights the applicant flew on that date. ll. MAJ/LTC BPC’s fly chart for 14 November 1965, which shows the details of the flights he flew on that date. mm. Foot Notes, which document the flight data for the applicant, which shows the applicant flew two helicopters with 55 landing during 9.8 hours (with co-pilot CWO S__ in his first aircraft and then CWO K__ in his second aircraft). nn. Letter (1st Indorsement) from LTC/LTG HGM, dated 24 October 1988, subject: Recommendation for CMH for CWO LCK, which states, in pertinent part, he performed heroically and professionally during the events described and that the applicant’s recommendation is made with utmost sincerity and reflects his best recollections of the truth of the events in which he participated and what he heard and observed. oo. Letter from MAJ DHH, dated 26 October 1990, which states, in pertinent part, he would like to thank the applicant and CWO LCK for risking their lives returning to the still hot landing zone and safely extracting his co-pilot, CWO KCF and remaining crew, along with the wounded infantrymen that had been put aboard the downed helicopter. pp. Endorsement of Medal of Honor award for MAJ/LTC BPC, CPT EWF, CPT JRM, CPT FM, and CWO LCK. qq. A postcard written to the applicant from LTC/LTG HGM, dated 8 September 1991, which states he admires what the applicant is doing. rr. Letter to the applicant from LTC/LTG HGM, dated 21 September 1992, which states his concerns in pursuing the action. ss. A photograph of LTC/LTG HGM addressed to the applicant. tt. Letter to the applicant from JLG, dated 10 November 1992, which thanks the applicant for telling his story and for his service. uu. Letter to the applicant from MAJ/LTC BPC, dated 27 March 1994, which summarizes what he remembers that day. vv. Statement from LTC JDC, dated 14 May 2000, which states he believes there were two individuals who deserved higher awards than what he recommended. ww. Letter to the applicant from COL RAN, dated 17 August 1993, which states how the awards were processed in different units during Vietnam. xx. The applicant’s officer evaluation report, for the period 15 September 1965 through 9 June 1966, which shows: * as platoon awards officer, the applicant’s contribution to the platoon and company were exemplary * he is an exceptional writer and has demonstrated this ability to a large degree in the performance of the additional duty as awards and decorations officer for the unit * the applicant completed an 8-hour day of flying and then devoted additional 4 to 5 hours preparing awards for processing yy. Recommendation packet for award of the Distinguished Service Cross for the applicant, dated 15 November 1994 for the events of 14 November 1965. The award was recommended by MAJ/LTC BPC. zz. Letter to the Chief of Staff of the Army from LTC/LTG HGM, dated 18 November 1994, which states that particular men who fought in Pleiku were not properly recognized. 4. The applicant also provided: a. Recommendation for Award for the applicant, dated 1 March 1996, which shows the applicant was recommended for the Distinguished Service Cross for the events on 14 November 1965. b. Fax Memorandum from MAJ/LTC BPC, dated 18 October 1996, which shows that on 14 November 1965 he was the commander of the lift unit supporting the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry in an air assault operation into LZ XRAY. The applicant was leading his fourth flight element. He did not know until years later that the applicant had the helicopters land at Plei Me and that he took over the lead of those helicopters by replacing another pilot. There is absolutely no question that he did this and that he flew two flights into LZ XRAY. c. An excerpt (as stated by the applicant) of a letter from MAJ/LTC BPC to the applicant, which states he supports a reconsideration of a Distinguished Service Cross for him, but not anyone else. What the applicant did deserves recognition and he will support the award. d. Letter from CWO WS, dated 11 November 1999, which states on the 14th of November 1965, while reinforcing troops in LZ XRAY and the helicopters were told to hold in place because the LZ was under fire. e. Letter from CWO WS, dated 3 September 2000, which states the applicant lead two helicopters loaded with ammunition to LZ XRAY. f. Letter from LTC/LTG HGM, dated 29 January 2003, which states on 12 December 1996, he recommended MAJ/LTC BPC for a Distinguished Service Cross for his actions on 14 November 1965. In the summer of 2001, MAJ EF was awarded the Medal of Honor in the same battle. g. Statement from KND, dated 4 March 2003, which summarizes his recollection of the events on 14 November 1965. h. Recommendation for Award for the applicant, dated 15 April 2003, which shows the applicant was recommended for the Medal of Honor for the combat heroism on 14 November 1965. i. Letter from CWO WS, dated 16 February 2006, which states his recollection of the events on 14 November 1965. j. Recommendation for Award for the applicant, dated 7 April 2006, which shows the applicant was recommended for the Medal of Honor for heroic combat on 14 November 1965. k. Letter from CWO WS, dated 8 August 2006, which states that he flew with the applicant into LZ XRAY and reiterates his support for the award. l. Statement from MAJ EWF, which shows his recommendation for another warrant officer to receive the Medal of Honor for his actions on 14 November 1965. m. Statement by PFC WW, dated 4 December 2006, which states he was an eye witness and participant to various flights supporting the ground troops in LZ XRAY and wishes to acknowledge the applicant’s bravery. n. Recommendation for Award for the applicant, dated 11 November 2007, which shows his award was downgraded to the Distinguished Service Cross. o. Statement by LTC RLS, dated 1 May 2007, which states in his opinion, the actions performed by the applicant did not meet the degree of gallantry, extraordinary heroism and intrepidity at risk of life so conspicuously to warrant the award of the Congressional Medal of Honor. p. Page 2 of DA Form 638, dated 11 November 2007, which shows the award recommendations from the applicant’s company commander and deputy commander, both recommending the applicant receive the award. q. Record of Army Decorations Board Action, dated 28 March 2008, 4 April 2008, 17 April 2008, and 6 December 2008, which show the board members recommended approval of the Medal of Honor for the applicant. r. Statement by LTG CWB, dated 4 April 2008, which states, in pertinent part, he is recommending the applicant for the Medal of Honor for his actions in the battle of Ia Drang, on 14 November 1965. He was the commander of the 1st Squadron, 9th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry Division. He was surprised when another Soldier received the Medal of Honor for similar actions and the applicant did not. s. Statement by CW4 WS, dated 24 June 2008, which states he recommends, without hesitation, the Medal of Honor for the applicant. t. Recommendation for Award for the applicant, dated 24 November 2008, which shows the applicant was recommended for the Medal of Honor for heroic combat on 14 November 1965. u. Statement by SSG KM, dated 9 January 2009, which states he was a flight crew chief and was on the first flight of the day missions. He served with the applicant and is proud of that. v. Statement by PFC KB, dated 20 January 2009, which states he was a door gunner on 14 November 1965 at the Ia Drang battle. They made four lifts into the landing zone where Soldiers were injured. In his opinion, the applicant did as much or more than the other Soldiers that received the Medal of Honor. w. Statement by SSG KOM, dated 18 January 2011, which states he was the flight platoon noncommissioned officer in charge for the mission on that day. He feels qualified to state that the applicant should receive the Medal of Honor. x. Recommendation for Award for another Soldier involved in the missions that day, dated 18 June 2002 and 13 November 2012, which show he was recommended for the Medal of Honor for heroic combat on 14 November 1965. y. Statement by CPT RK, dated 29 January 2007, which summarizes the events in Vietnam. z. Statement by BB, dated 1 November 2014, which states the actions of CPT K on 14 November 1965 were heroic. aa. Statement by RRB, which states he was a door gunner in the battle of Ia Drang and summarized events with the choppers on 14 November 1965. bb. Statement by MAJ DHH, dated 10 January 2007, which he summarizes events relating to CW4 LK on 14 November 1965. cc. Excerpt from “Chopper,” specifically, Chapter 6 pertaining to The Battle of Ia Drang Valley which summarizes the events on 14 November 1965. dd. Transcript of interviews with MAJ EF, COL GR, CWO KD, CW4 LM, and Applicant pertaining to the oral and video history of Ia Drang battle on 14 November 1965. ee. Letter to Congressional Representative from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command Military Awards Branch, dated 20 December 2004, which states the recommendation for award of the Medal of Honor for the applicant was forwarded to the Army Decorations Branch for consideration and the board determined that the degree of action and service rendered did not meet the strict criteria for the proposed award. ff. Letter to the Applicant from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command Military Awards Branch, dated 27 December 2006, which states the board determined that the degree of action and service rendered did not meet the strict criteria for the proposed award. Based on the board's recommendation, the Commanding General, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, on behalf of the Secretary of the Army disapproved award of the Medal of Honor, affirming that the previously approved Silver Star was the appropriate award for the applicant's actions. gg. Letter to the Applicant from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command Military Awards Branch, dated 27 February 2008, which states the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his Silver Star to the Medal of Honor fails to note new, substantive material information not previously considered. hh. Internet print-out of the U.S. Army Medal Statistics by conflict, operation, or incident. ii. Internet print-out from the Adjutant General Directorate, which shows the awards and decorations statistics by conflict, operation, or incident. jj. Memorandum, subject: Comprehensive Military Decorations and Awards Review, dated 20 March 2014, which states the Secretary of Defense directed a comprehensive review of the Department’s military decorations and awards program to ensure it provides avenues to appropriately recognize the service, sacrifices, and actions of service members. kk. Article, Pentagon may upgrade hundreds of troops to possible Medals of Honor, dated 6 January 2016, which states the Pentagon will review more than 1,100 medals issued since 11 September 2001 for possible upgrade to the Medal of Honor. ll. Article, Defense Department Announces Service Cross and Silver Star Review, dated 7 January 2016, which states the Secretary of Defense directed the military departments to review Distinguished Service Cross, Navy Cross, Air Force Cross, and Silver Star Medal recommendations from the recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan to ensure service members awarded these medals were appropriately recognized for their valorous actions. mm. Article, Announces Changes to Military Decorations and Awards Program, dated 7 January 2016, which states the Pentagon has made a number of changes to the military decorations and awards program to ensure service members receive appropriate recognition for their actions. nn. Citation, Distinguished Service Cross for MAJ CSK. oo. Citation, Medal of Honor for MAJ CSK, MAJ WEA, MAJ PB, MAJ BC, CWO FF, CPT EF, CWO MN, and CPT JS. pp. Letter from GEN JWN to the Secretary of the Army, dated 15 May 2019, which states he reviewed the packet in support of the Medal of Honor for the applicant and unequivocally believes the applicant’s actions merit the award of the Medal of Honor. qq. Record of Army Decorations Board Action, dated 23 November 2017, 8 April 2019, 19 April 2019, 28 April 2019, 8 May 2019, and 12 May 2019, which show the board members recommended approval of the Medal of Honor for the applicant. 5. A review of the applicant’s service records show: a. Having prior enlisted service in the U.S. Marine Corps, the applicant was appointed as a commissioned officer in the Regular Army on 1 June 1956. He held primary specialty 15A (Aviation Officer). b. He served in: * Korea from 24 March 1962 to 8 April 1963 * Dominican Republic from 13 June 2965 to 19 July 1965 * Vietnam from 12 August 1965 to 7 July 1966 and 24 July 1968 to 13 July 1969 * Germany from 26 November 1975 to 11 June 1980 c. Permanent Orders XX-2, dated 27 March 1997, awarded the applicant the Silver Star for gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States on 14 November 1965. Additionally, this order revoked the applicant’s Distinguished Flying Cross (General Orders 5XX, dated 27 February 1966). d. The narrative for the Silver Star awarded to the applicant reads for Gallantry in action: while participating in aerial flight, [Applicant], assigned to Company A, 5th Infantry Regiment, 229th Assault Helicopter Battalion, 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile), United States Army, Vietnam, distinguished himself at Landing Zone X-RAY, in the Ia Drang valley, Republic of Vietnam on 14 November 1965. On this date, serving as Section Commander of 4 UH-1D helicopters in support of the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment who was engaged in mortal combat with an estimated 2 North Vietnamese regiments. He led his section on 10 sorties into a very hostile and Intense battle area under the most extreme and perilous conditions. He evacuated 12 seriously wounded soldiers. His intrepidity was conspicuous when due to the Urgency of the situation, he switched aircraft and voluntarily led a flight of 2 back to the battle area to an emergency Landing Zone that had been hastily prepared by the ground commander. Upon departure from this sortie, his trail helicopter was hit by enemy fire, he unhesitantly, with utter disregard for his own safety, returned to the downed helicopter, extracted its crew of 4 and an additional 6 wounded who were on board. [Applicant] consistently displayed acts of personal bravery so conspicuous that he incontestably stood above his comrades with extraordinary merit. Each of his 10 sorties was accomplished under extremely perilous conditions. His gallantry and high degree of heroism coupled with his selfless acts and intrepidity are in keeping with the highest traditions of military service and reflect great credit on himself, his unit, and the United States Army. e. Following this battle, the applicant continued his service in Vietnam and in military service for years to come. f. The applicant was honorably retired from active duty on 30 June 1986. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), as amended by his DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214), shows he completed 30 years and 1 month of active service. It also shows he was awarded or authorized: * Legion of Merit (1st Oak Leaf Cluster) * Distinguished Flying Cross [Revoked] * Bronze Star Medal (1st Oak Leaf Cluster) * Defense Meritorious Service Medal (1st Oak Leaf Cluster) * Meritorious Service Medal (2nd Oak Leaf Cluster) * Air Medal (17th Award) * Air Medal with “V” Device (2nd Award) * Joint Service Commendation Medal * Army Commendation Medal (1st Oak Leaf Cluster) * Presidential Unit Commendation (Army) * Meritorious Unit Commendation (2nd Oak Leaf Cluster) * Army Good Conduct Medal * National Defense Service Medal (1st Oak Leaf Cluster) * Vietnam Service Medal (7) * Army Forces Expeditionary Medal * Army Service Ribbon * Overseas Service Ribbon * Parachutist Badge * Senior Army Aviator Badge * Ranger Tab * Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm * Joint Chiefs of Staff Identification Badge * Army General Staff Identification Badge * Overseas Service Bar (4) * Silver Star [Issued 3 November 2000] 6. The Army awards system recognizes and reacts to distinguishing acts of valor and bravery for Soldiers. The commander on the ground acts as a steward to ensure the proper recognition of our brave men and women. The Army has always been fully committed to the responsibility of properly recognizing Soldiers for their valor, heroism, and meritorious service through a fair and consistent decorations and awards policy and process. a. Awards and decorations are very important to Soldiers. Equally important is that for the awards program to be credible to the Soldiers and the American people, it must ensure that it recognizes individuals with a military award worthy of their accomplishments and acts of valor. It must ensure the integrity of the award is maintained through strict procedures and proper justifications. Finally, it must place trust and confidence in commanders to properly execute the program. b. The criteria for military awards are set forth in statutes, executive orders, and appropriate regulations. The criteria for the three highest valor awards are established by law and have not changed from what they were in past conflicts. Army regulation and policy establish the standards by which those awards are processed, approved, and presented. This consistency upholds the heritage of the awards and the legacy of the heroes who have earned them. c. Army policy allows any Soldier to recommend another Soldier for an award. The Army's awards program relies on those with first-hand knowledge of a Soldier's heroic or valorous action to recommend the Soldier for the appropriate award. Award recommendations are sent up through the Soldier's chain of command to company, battalion, brigade, division, and corps commanders. Commanders at every level of review can recommend approval or upgrade of the award based upon their authority. Commanders with authority to approve awards also have the authority to downgrade or disapprove awards based on their judgment, knowledge, and the criteria established for the award. Command involvement is critical for program success. 7. The highest awards for valor are, in descending order, the Medal of Honor, the Distinguished Service Cross, and the Silver Star. a. Medal of Honor –The Medal of Honor is awarded by the President in the name of Congress to a service member who distinguishes himself or herself conspicuously by gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his or her life above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in action against an enemy of the United States, while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force, or while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. The deed performed must have been one of personal bravery or self-sacrifice so conspicuous as to clearly distinguish the individual above his or her comrades and must have involved risk of life. Incontestable proof of the performance of the service is required and each recommendation for the award of this decoration will be considered on the standard of extraordinary merit. Again, only the President can award the Medal of Honor. b. Distinguished Service Cross – The second highest award bestowed upon a Soldier for valor is the Distinguished Service Cross. The Distinguished Service Cross is awarded to a Soldier who distinguishes himself or herself by extraordinary heroism not justifying the award of a Medal of Honor while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States, while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing/foreign force, or while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing Armed Force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. The act or acts of heroism must be so notable and have involved risk of life so extraordinary as to set the individual apart from his or her comrades. Today, the Distinguished Service Cross is approved by the Secretary of the Army. c. Silver Star – The third highest award for combat heroism is the Silver Star, is awarded to a Soldier who is cited for gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force or while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. The required gallantry, while of a lesser degree than that required for award of the Distinguished Service Cross, must nevertheless have been performed with marked distinction. 8. As evidenced by the above descriptions, there exists a very fine distinction between "conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity," "extraordinary heroism," and "gallantry in action." Often times, the degree of heroism required for a particular award is blurred and subject to personal interpretation. What is not subject to interpretation is the selfless sacrifice demonstrated by all recipients of these three highest awards for valor. All recipients are, without doubt, true American heroes. 9. The applicant's valor and courage on 14 November 1965 under extremely hazardous conditions is acknowledged and applauded. However, it is extremely difficult to make the necessary distinctions as to whether a particular act constitutes "conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity," "extraordinary heroism," or "gallantry in action." a. While the applicant believes the actions were similar to those of other Soldiers who were awarded the Medal of Honor, each case stands on its own merits. In this case, the applicant's record shows he was clearly cited for gallantry in action against the enemy in Vietnam. A decision was made to initially award him the Distinguished Flying Cross. b. However, years later, the Army felt his actions warranted a higher award. Upon further review, it was determined that his actions rose to the level of "gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States while engaged in military operations." Accordingly, in March 1997, the Department of the Army upgraded the Distinguished Flying Cross originally awarded to the applicant by the 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile) on 27 February 1966 for his heroic actions in support of the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry, at LZ XRAY on 14 November 1965. c. The decision of whether to award an individual a decoration and which decoration to award is a judgment call made by the commander having award approval authority. Commanders at the time of the act, or shortly thereafter, determined the applicant's actions were so extraordinary and so noteworthy as to warrant award of the Distinguished Flying Cross. d. The applicant's award has since been reviewed and re-reviewed for an upgrade to the Medal of Honor. However, the Army Decorations Board determined the degree of action and service rendered by the applicant did not meet the criteria for award of the Medal of Honor. Based on the board's recommendation, the Commanding General, HRC, on behalf of the Secretary of the Army, disapproved award of the Medal of Honor affirming that the previously-approved award of the Silver Star was the appropriate recognition for the applicant's heroic actions. e. The Army Decorations Board was able to evaluate the applicant's act of heroism against other acts of heroism from the Vietnam era which did result in award of the Medal of Honor. The board opined that the applicant's actions did not rise to the level of "conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity" in action necessary to merit an upgrade to the Medal of Honor. f. There is no change in the account of the applicant's actions in 1965 or new evidence presented that would suggest an error or an injustice was committed by Army Decorations Board. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents, evidence in the records, HRC advisory and regulatory guidance. The Board considered the applicant’s statement, his record of service and documents provided by the applicant. The Board determined the Army awards system recognizes and reacts to distinguishing acts of valor and bravery for Soldiers. The commander on the ground acts as a steward to ensure the proper recognition of our brave men and women. The Army has always been fully committed to the responsibility of properly recognizing Soldiers for their valor, heroism, and meritorious service through a fair and consistent decorations and awards policy and process. The criteria for the three highest valor awards are established by law and have not changed from what they were in past conflicts. Army regulation and policy establish the standards by which those awards are processed, approved, and presented. 2. The highest awards for valor are, in descending order, the MOH, the DSC, and the Silver Star. There exists a very fine distinction between "conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity," "extraordinary heroism," and "gallantry in action." Oftentimes, the degree of heroism required for a particular award is blurred and subject to personal interpretation. What is not subject to interpretation is the selfless sacrifice demonstrated by all recipients of these three highest awards for valor. All recipients are, without doubt, true American heroes. 3. The applicant's record shows he was cited for heroism in action against an enemy of the United States while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force in Vietnam. A decision was made by the Department of the Army to upgraded the Distinguished Flying Cross originally awarded to the applicant by the 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile) on 27 February 1966 for his heroic actions in support of the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry, at LZ XRAY on 14 November 1965 to a Silver Star. 4. In 23 November 2017,8 April 2019, 19 April 2019, 28 April 2019, 8 May 2019, and 12 May 2019, a recommendation was submitted to the Army Decorations Board Action for action which show the board members recommended approval of the Medal of Honor for the applicant. Upon further review, based on the board's recommendation, the Commanding General, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, on behalf of the Secretary of the Army disapproved award of the Medal of Honor, affirming that the previously approved Silver Star was the appropriate award for the applicant's actions. 5. The Board determined a review of the evidence before this Board does not indicate that there is any substantial change in the account of the applicant's actions in 14 November 1965 or any substantial new documentation that was not available to the SA in his consideration of the recommendation for upgrade that led to approval of the Silver Star. 6. The applicant’s request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully considered. In this case, the evidence of record was sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision. As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not necessary to serve the interest of equity and justice in this case. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : 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 the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned 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. REFERENCES: 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 ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. The Medal of Honor, Title 10, U.S. Code, section 3741, was established by Joint Resolution of Congress on 12 July 1862 (amended by acts on 9 July 1918 and 25 July 1963). The Medal of Honor is awarded by the President in the name of Congress to a person who, while a member of the Army, distinguishes himself or herself conspicuously by gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his or her life above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States, while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force, or while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. The deed performed must have been one of personal bravery or self-sacrifice so conspicuous as to clearly distinguish the individual above his comrades and must have involved risk of life. Incontestable proof of the performance of the service will be exacted and each recommendation for the award of this decoration will be considered on the standard of extraordinary merit. 3. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides for the following awards: a. The Distinguished Service Cross is awarded to a person who, while serving in any capacity with the Army, distinguished himself or herself by extraordinary heroism while engaged in action against an enemy of the United States not justifying award of the Medal of Honor. The act or acts of heroism must have been so notable and have involved risk of life so extraordinary as to set the individual apart from his or her comrades. b. The Silver Star is awarded for gallantry in action against the enemy. The required gallantry (spirited and conspicuous acts of heroism and courage) must have been performed with marked distinction. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. 4. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity, which is that what the Army did was correct. a. The ABCMR is not an investigative body and decides cases based on the evidence that is presented in the military records provided and the independent evidence submitted with the application. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. b. The ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing or request additional evidence or opinions. Additionally, it states in paragraph 2-11 that applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20200000127 17 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1