ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 September 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170018696 APPLICANT REQUESTS: in effect, reversal of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) to forward to the Army Decorations Board, his request to upgrade his already-upgraded Distinguished Service Cross to a Medal of Honor. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Letter, dated 30 March 2012, from the Army Review Boards Agency * Letters, dated 13 March 2012, 1 March 2016, and 19 September 2017 from HRC * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 22 January 1991 FACTS: 1. The applicant states in May 2004, this Board upgraded his award of the Bronze Star Medal with V Device to an award of the Distinguished Service Cross. He has since tried four times to have the Army Decorations Board add his file to those being reviewed, including three letters to Congressmen and two letters to the President of the United States. The response from HRC is always the same, that he must provide evidence that changes fundamentally the scope and magnitude of his actions. He is not requesting award of the Medal of Honor. He is simply asking to be given a fair review of his actions. 2. Review of the applicant’s service records shows: a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 August 1964. He served in a variety of stateside or overseas assignments, including Vietnam, Alaska, Germany, and Hawaii, and he attained the rank of first sergeant (1SG). b. He retired on 31 August 1984 and he was placed on the retired list in his retired grade of 1SG on 1 September 1984. c. General Orders Number 136, issued by Headquarters, 25th Infantry Division on 29 May 1966, awarded him the Bronze Star with V Device for heroism on 19 may 1966 in Vietnam. The awards reads: He distinguished himself by heroic actions on 19 May 1966 in the Republic of Vietnam. On that date, he was serving as a medical aidman attached to a rifle company on a search and destroy mission when elements of the company encountered intense Viet Cong fire from automatic weapons concealed in the thick jungle foliage. As injured Americans fell, he immediately moved through the withering enemy fire to give aid. Approaching one injured man, he observed that his injury was of a nature that the man could not be moved. Completely disregarding his own personal safety, he remained with the man’s side trying vainly to revive him. He then turned his attention elsewhere, moving to other injured Soldiers, giving aid and encouragement, and directing the evacuation of the wounded. He is credited with saving several lives. d. On 11 April 2002, a Senator submitted an awards recommendation packet to the Commander of the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) (now called HRC), requesting that the applicant's Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device be upgraded to a Distinguished Service Cross. The packet included a recommendation for the Distinguished Service Cross (DA Form 638) from the applicant's unit commander in Vietnam, a retired lieutenant colonel (LTC), and supporting statements from the division commander at the time, a retired general and former Army Chief of Staff, and eyewitness statements from several other soldiers who were involved in the action, to include two other unit commanders. e. The award recommendation from the applicant's unit commander in Vietnam confirms that on 19 May 1966, the applicant distinguished himself by displaying extraordinary bravery and heroism while participating in a battalion size search and destroy mission in the Bo Loi Woods. The recommendation indicates that the applicant continuously exposed himself to enemy fire to care for and evacuate the wounded. It further states that the applicant exposed himself to scathing fire each time he moved a wounded soldier to the rear for evacuation. He further states that the applicant's presence of mind during the pandemonium was amazing, and after he was wounded in action and his replacement killed in action, the applicant remained and continued to care for and evacuate wounded Soldiers through the completion of the operation, despite his own wounds. The commander further stated that as an infantry unit commander in combat, he witnessed many brave acts; however, the applicant's superb heroism on 19 May 1966 stood out even among these. He stated that when he heard the comments of his men and added them to what he witnessed firsthand, he recommended the applicant for the Distinguished Service Cross. He contends that he still recommends approval of that award, and that whether the award was denied or lost through administrative error, the situation should be corrected and the applicant should receive this well-deserved award. d. Several statements of support for the award were provided with the award recommendation. All attest to the applicant's bravery and heroism on 19 May 1966. e. On 10 June 2002, the Army Decorations Board determined that the degree of action and service rendered did not meet the strict criteria for the proposed award. Based on this recommendation, the PERSCOM Commanding General (CG) disapproved the award of the Distinguished Service Cross, without downgrade to a lesser award. f. The applicant's division commander at the time, who is a retired general and former Army Chief of Staff, provided a letter of support to this Board, dated 28 October 2003. He stated that in his capacity as the CG of the 25th Infantry Division, Vietnam, he awarded the applicant the Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device in recognition for his repeated acts of heroism in combat against the enemy on 19 May 1966. He further stated that the records now at hand show the applicant clearly went beyond the parameters normally associated with the Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device during this combat action. He further added: (1) At the time of the award, it was his policy to immediately recognize actions such as those of the applicant with an award for gallantry or heroism pending an award by higher headquarters more in keeping with the true magnitude of the action. He claims that in carrying out this policy, the paperwork could be mislaid or lost with the result that the deserved award was not received and it appears to him that such was the case in this instance. (2) The action involving the applicant was particularly intense. Three of his company commanders were wounded that day and it is understandable that at the time the details of the fighting were not precisely nor clearly set forth in the immediate aftermath of the action. He concludes by stating that he hopes that a way can be found to rectify his failure to recognize and document the applicant's heroism. f. On 4 May 2004, the Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely file. As a result, the Board recommends correction of the records to show he was awarded the Silver Star, for his heroic actions of 19 May 1966, while serving in Vietnam, in lieu of the Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to award of the Distinguished Service Cross. g. On 25 May 2004, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the Army Board for Correction of Military Records' recommendation to award the applicant the Distinguished Service Cross, instead of the Silver Star, for his actions in Vietnam. h. On 25 May 2004, HRC revoked the orders that awarded the applicant the Bronze Star Medal with V Device and published Permanent Orders 146-3 awarding him the Distinguished Service Cross for his heroic actions on 19 May 1966. i. On 22 March 2012, by letter to the applicant’s Member of Congress, the ARBA Chief of Case Management Division responded in reference to an expression of interest in the application to the ABCMR submitted by the applicant, Jr. in which he requested upgrade of his Distinguished Service Cross (DSC) to the Medal of Honor. Before consideration by the ABCMR an applicant must have exhausted all administrative remedies available to them to correct an alleged error or injustice in their military record. In the case of the applicant, despite the Army Decoration Board’s (ADB) differing conclusion as to the appropriateness of the upgraded award, his request must first be reviewed by the ADB as required under Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1130 (10 USC 1130). As a result, after coordination with the HRC Awards Branch, ARBA returned the applicant’s request to HRC for appropriate action by the ADB. j. HRC also responded to the applicant’s Member of Congress and stated in response to his 6 December 2011 letter on behalf of the applicant, concerning his desire to be awarded the Medal of Honor in lieu of the Distinguished Service Cross. HE was unable to process this reconsideration for the Medal of Honor. Per Department of Defense and Army policy, a request for reconsideration to upgrade a previously approved award can be submitted only if new, substantive and material information is furnished. The additional justification for reconsideration must be in letter format, and cannot exceed two single-spaced typewritten pages. The additional justification must note any omissions or errors contained in the original recommendation for award or supporting documents. k. In March 2016, HRC again wrote to the applicant’s Member of Congress concerning his desire to be awarded the Medal of Honor (in lieu of the Distinguished Service Cross) for his actions in the Republic of Vietnam. The Chief of the Awards Branch indicated that he understood the applicant’s desire to obtain additional award recognition for his military service; however, HRC was unable to forward his request for reconsideration to the Army Decorations Board. Awards are not automatic, nor can preconditions for an award be established. In this regard, the applicant must abide by the administrative requirements pursuant to 10 USC 1130 and Department of Defense Manual 1348.33, Volume 1 (Manual of Military Decorations and Awards); and Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) in order to pursue Medal of Honor reconsideration. As previously stated, the applicant must provide new, substantive and material information directly pertaining to his extraordinary heroism. This information must fundamentally change the scope and magnitude of his actions during the incident in question. The submission of new minor details, or information previously known to this Command, will not justify a request for reconsideration. l. In September 2017, HRC again wrote to the applicant concerning his desire to be awarded the Medal of Honor in lieu of his existing award of the Distinguished Service Cross. The Chief of Awards Branch informed him that he remained unable to forward his request for reconsideration to the Army Decorations Board. As we previously informed, awards are not automatic, nor can preconditions for an award be established. A request for reconsideration is predicated on the presentation of new, substantive, and material information directly pertaining to his actions which were not known to this office. The new information presented must fundamentally change the scope and magnitude of his actions. The submission of minor details or information previously considered will not justify a request for reconsideration. Lastly, his award of the Distinguished Service Cross cannot be reviewed under the recent Department of Defense directive. Only the Service Crosses and Silver Stars awarded since 18 September 2001, were reviewed for potential upgrade to the Medal of Honor. There are currently no plans to review awards for service prior to this date. 3. By law (10 USC section 1130), DOD policy (DOD Manual 1348.33, Volume 1), and regulation (AR 600-8-22), awards are not automatic, nor can preconditions for an award be established. A request for reconsideration of an existing award is predicated on the presentation of new, substantive, and material information directly pertaining to the member’s actions. The new information presented must fundamentally change the scope and magnitude of his actions. The submission of minor details or information previously considered will not justify a request for reconsideration. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board determined relief was not warranted. Based upon the review of all documentary evidence provided by the applicant and found within the military service record, the Board found there was no evidence provided that was not already considered. The Board found that the applicant had been properly given all due consideration and that there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice which would warrant making a change to the military record of the applicant. 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. X CHAIRPERSON Signed by: 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. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states: 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 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 or 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 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 to a person who, while serving in any capacity with the U.S. Army, 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 the Distinguished Service Cross, must nevertheless have been performed with marked distinction. c. The Bronze Star Medal is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity in or with the Army of the United States after 6 December 1941, distinguished himself or herself by heroic or meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight, in connection with military operations against an armed enemy; or while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. It may be awarded for acts of heroism, performed under circumstances described above. 2. DOD Manual 1348.3 (Manual of Military Decorations and Awards: DoD-Wide Performance and Valor Awards; Foreign Awards; Military Awards to Foreign Personnel and U.S. Public Health Service Officers; and Miscellaneous Information), states upon request of a member of Congress pursuant to section 1130 of Reference (f), the Secretary concerned shall review the proposal for the award or presentation of decoration (or the upgrading of a decoration), either for an individual or unit, that is not otherwise authorized to be presented or awarded due to limitations established by law or policy for timely submission of a recommendation for such award or presentation. Based upon such review, the Secretary concerned shall make a determination as to the merits of approving the award or presentation of the decoration and other determinations necessary to comply with congressional reporting in accordance with Reference (f). Upon determination by the Secretary concerned that a Service Cross or Silver Star award merits approval, the Secretary concerned shall seek the appropriate time waiver from Congress if required.