MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:                              
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-09697

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	M		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. 		Chairperson	
	Mr. 		Member	
	Mr. 		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That he be awarded a Distinguished Unit Citation, an Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) and a Distinguished Service Cross (DSC).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he has obtained a book which lists Army awards and decorations and he believes that his service warranted these awards and decorations.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 October 1945 after having served 1 year, 2 months and 12 days of an induction.  His occupational specialty was a truck driver.

He was honorably discharged for the convenience of the Government on 4 January 1947.  That discharge was based on a pre-existing medical condition which “ordinarily is not disabling, but this patient has a fixation on this condition and will probably continue to complain and will not make a satisfactory soldier.”

His WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation), shows that he was issued the European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal and the World War II Victory Medal.

In response to numerous inquiries made by the applicant throughout the years, he was also awarded the Good Conduct Medal, the Meritorious Unit Emblem, and the American Defense Service Medal. 

In a prior request made to the Board, the applicant had requested that his discharge be corrected to a medical retirement.  The staff of the Board had explained to him that he was discharged prior to the Career Compensation Act of 1 October 1949, the act which established medical retirements for enlisted personnel and ,therefore, was not eligible for such a retirement.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 states, in pertinent part, that the DSC is awarded for heroism or extraordinary heroism not justifying the award of the Medal of Honor.  The act or acts of heroism must be so notable and have involved such risk of life so as to set the individual apart from his comrades.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.  Recommendations must be made within 2 years of the event or period of service and the award must be made within 3 years.  There are regulatory provisions for lost recommendations but not for late recommendations, reconsideration, nor for upgrading to a more prestigious award.  No precondition, such as promises of a specific award for the attainment of some particular goal, may be established.  Anyone may recommend another individual for an award and doing so is a subjective decision.  Likewise, the decision as to whether or not an award is approved, down graded or disapproved is subjectively made by the commander having approval authority.  War-time approval authority for the DSC rests with commanders in the grade of major general or higher.  It may be delegated to brigadier generals commanding tactical units while filling a major general's position.

The ARCOM may be awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the Army after 6 December 1941, distinguished himself by heroism, meritorious achievement or meritorious service.

This regulation also states that the Meritorious Unit Commendation is awarded for outstanding wartime service of at least 6 continuous months.  Stateside units and those outside the area of operations are excluded.

The Presidential Unit Citation (know as the Distinguished Unit Citation until 3 November 1966) is awarded for extraordinary heroism in action.  A unit must display such gallantry, determination and esprit de corps in accomplishing its mission as would warrant award of the DSC to an individual.  

This regulation specifies that 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 Army does not condone self-recognition; therefore, a soldier may not recommend himself/herself for award of a decoration.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant was never assigned to a unit when that unit was awarded the Distinguished Unit Citation.  As such, he is not entitled to that award.

2.  Although the applicant participated in hostilities during WWII, there is no evidence that he performed any act of heroism that stood out from among the normal actions taken in a combat zone by his fellow soldiers.  In addition, he was never recommended for any decoration.  Absent such evidence and recommendation, there is no basis to award him either the ARCOM or the DSC.

3.  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

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC9809697	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	YYYYMMDD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.