| Mr. Loren G. Harrell | Director | |
| Mr. Hubert S. Shaw, Jr. | Analyst |
| Ms. June Hajjar | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Fred K. McCoy | Member | |
| Ms. Shirley L. Powell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That award of the Distinguished Service Cross be upgraded to an award of the Medal of Honor.
APPLICANT STATES: That the citation for his Distinguished Service Cross indicates action which merits award of the Medal of Honor. The applicant believes he would have been awarded the Medal of Honor if it were not for his record of being absent without leave earlier in his service.
COUNSEL CONTENDS: That the applicant’s request should be carefully considered. The Veterans of Foreign Wars, as counsel, supports the applicant’s request particularly in view of his extraordinary heroism which resulted in numerous enemy casualties and saving the lives of several fellow soldiers. Therefore, counsel requests full and impartial consideration of this case and relief as warranted by the facts.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant entered active duty on 27 May 1966 and completed training as an infantryman. He served in Vietnam from 10 June 1967 to 5 June 1968 and again from 2 May 1969 to 16 October 1969. The applicant was discharged from active duty with an honorable discharge in the grade of E-5 on 21 October 1969.
The applicant was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross by Headquarters, United States Army Vietnam General Orders Number 954, dated 1 March 1968.
Informal coordination with the Awards Branch of the Total Army Personnel Command reveals the applicant received an interim award of the Silver Star by 1st Cavalry Division General Orders Number 277, dated 14 January 1968. Special instructions of the orders announcing award of the Distinguished Service Cross superseded this interim award.
There is no indication in the applicant’s records that he was considered for or recommended for award of the Medal of Honor. The applicant’s records show that he was absent without leave four times for a total of 94 days between 6 November 1966 and 21 March 1967 prior to the 7 December 1967 action for which he was decorated with the Distinguished Service Cross. Records also indicate that he was absent without leave for 56 days during September and October 1968. There is no evidence of record which shows the award recommendation by the applicant’s chain of command was influenced by his absence without leave prior to his first assignment in Vietnam.
Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, for award of the Distinguished Service Cross. The Distinguished Service Cross is awarded to a person who, while serving in any capacity in the Army, distinguished himself or herself by extraordinary heroism not justifying award of the Medal of Honor. The regulation requires that the act or acts meriting award of the Distinguished Service Cross must have been so notable and have involved risk of life so extraordinary as to set the individual apart from his or her comrades.
Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, for award of the Medal of Honor. 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. The regulation provides that 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 the risk of life. Further, the regulation requires that “incontestable proof” of the performance of the service will be exacted and each recommendation for this decoration will be considered on the standard of extraordinary merit.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. There is no evidence of record, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to show that he was considered for or recommended for the Medal of Honor. There also is no evidence to support the applicant’s contention that he was denied award of the Medal of Honor because of his previous incidents of absence without leave.
2. The Board notes the applicant’s chain of command, which was present and had all the facts at the time in question, had the opportunity to recommend the applicant for award of the Medal of Honor, but chose to recommend him instead for the Distinguished Service Cross (the second highest award for heroism in action).
3. The Board notes that the award approval authority for the Distinguished Service Cross in this case was the four star general officer in command of all U.S. Army forces in Vietnam and that he could have recommended the applicant for award of the Medal of Honor. However, the Commanding General of U.S. Army Vietnam determined the Distinguished Service Cross was the appropriate award for the applicant’s actions and approved this award rather than recommend him for award of the Medal of Honor.
4. The evidence of record in this case shows that the applicant’s chain of command recommended award of the Distinguished Service Cross for his “extraordinary heroism” in action and that the award approval authority determined the Distinguished Service Cross was appropriate. In the absence of evidence showing that the award process in this case was flawed or was improperly influenced, the Board is not predisposed to overturn the decision of the commanders on the scene at the time in question. Therefore, the Board has determined that the applicant is not entitled to award of the Medal of Honor.
5. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.
6. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
JH_____ FKM_____ SLP_____ DENY APPLICATION
Loren G. Harrell
Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110005448
In a letter to the applicant, dated 19 October 2010, Chief, Military Awards Branch, HRC, stated on 26 August 2009, the Commanding General, HRC, disapproved forwarding the recommendation to the Senior Army Decorations Board and affirmed that the previously awarded Distinguished Flying Cross was the appropriate award for his action. A letter to LTC B_____, dated 22 February 2011, from the Army Review Board Agency stated that in order to initiate a review of the applicant's military records...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070006981
In a 2 March 2006 letter, the Chief, Military Awards Branch stated there was nothing the Army Decorations Board could do and referred to the applicant to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). The SGM concludes that the applicant risked his life above and beyond the call of duty with heroic courage in the face of the enemy saving many American lives; f. In his statement, dated 7 December 2004, the Commander of the Department of California Military Order of the Purple...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019742
On 21 February 1968, the applicant and four comrades were engaged with enemy soldiers when one of his comrades attempted to throw an un-pinned phosphorous grenade at an enemy position. At that time, the applicant moved across the room, grabbed the live grenade, and rolled toward a hole in the wall placing his body between the grenade and the other four men, and as he attempted to throw it, it detonated burning him critically, but saving the lives of four men. Army Regulation 600-8-22...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010262
e. Authority to Award Medal of Honor: A Medal of Honor may be awarded to a Jewish American war veteran or Hispanic American war veteran in accordance with the recommendation of the Secretary concerned under subsection d. f. Waiver of Time Limits: Any award of the Medal of Honor may be made under subsection e without regard to Title 10, U.S. Code, section 3744, 6248, or 8744, as applicable, and any regulation or other administrative restriction on the time for awarding the Medal of Honor or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018682
General Orders Number 11136 Headquarters, 1st Cavalry Division, Vietnam, dated 23 August 1968, awarded the applicant the Silver Star (SS) for gallantry in action while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an armed hostile force on 21 February 1968. In denying the applicant's request in 2009, the Board clearly noted his contention that "[he] and four comrades [not one comrade] were engaged with enemy Soldiers when one of his comrades attempted to throw an un-pinned...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080002785
The applicant states: a. he has sufficient medical proof and examination of combat disabilities to show that the Army should have granted him a medical discharge or retirement under honorable conditions; b. his combat record shows that, as a medic, he was involved in 4 separate acts in a 15-hour period. The applicant's VA examination reports show he was diagnosed and evaluated by the VA some 35 years after his service in the Republic of Vietnam. The evidence of record shows that: a. the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016314
The applicant's records do not contain general orders awarding him the Medal of Honor, the Silver Star, or the Bronze Star Medal. In the applicant's case, it is noted that: a. the applicant's record is void of a recommendation for award of the Medal of Honor; there are no general orders that show the applicant was awarded the Medal of Honor; and the applicant did not provide any incontestable proof of the performance of the service that shows he distinguished himself conspicuously by...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006725
(2) During the period 12 to 15 April 1972, at Fire Support Base "Charlie," the applicant had been wounded five times during the battle, he refused medical evacuation two times, exposed himself continuously to enemy fire directed at him, for four days. f. A statement from the unit's advisor, wherein the individual stated he witnessed the acts of extraordinary heroism by the applicant in the performance of his duties to the 11th Airborne Battalion. A letter, dated 17 January 2013, from the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004355C070208
Powers | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant and another man volunteered to accompany him to the landing zone where they saw to his extraction and then returned to the team's position. Given the facts of the case, the Board has determined that the applicant's actions were not quite at the required degree of gallantry that earned Specialist W___ the Distinguished Service Cross and thus do...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006073
He stated the Army Decorations Board reviewed the applicant's Distinguished Service Cross award documents in 2001, along with the new materials that were provided, and determined the degree of action and service rendered did not meet the extraordinary heroism required for the proposed award of the Medal of Honor. On or about 18 March 2014, the applicant learned that the President of the United States awarded 24 Army veterans the Medal of Honor based on section 522 of the FY02 NDAA that...