MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           20 June 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000037893

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Joyce A. Hughes		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Van B. Cunningham		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		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:  The award of the Silver Star.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was recommended between September and October 1970, for the Distinguished Service Cross (DSC).  The DSC was later downgraded to the Silver Star award.  He recently received DA Form 1577 (Authorization for Issuance of Awards), which authorized the issuance of other awards, but the Silver Star award was not listed.

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

He reenlisted in the Regular Army on 25 September 1969, for a period of 4 years, 
with 1 year and 9 days of prior active service.  He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91D (Operating Room Specialist).

The applicant’s DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows that he was assigned to the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from January – November 1970, as a medical aidman. It also showed that on 18 November 1970, the applicant was hospitalized at Ireland Army Hospital, Fort Knox, Kentucky.  The applicant’s military record does not show that he was recommended for the award of the DSC or the Silver Star nor does his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharged) show  evidence that he was recommended for the DSC or the Silver Star, for the period in question.

On 13 September 1973, the applicant was honorably discharged.  During this period of service he completed 3 years, 11 months and 19 days of creditable service.  He was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Service Medal, the Combat Medical Badge, the Bronze Star Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, the Purple Heart and the Army Good Conduct Medal. 

On 14 September 1973, the applicant again reenlisted for a period of 4 years.  His DA Form 20 showed that he was assigned to various commands such as Fort Dix, New Jersey, Fort Lee, Virginia and Okinawa Japan.  On 13 September 1977, the applicant was honorably discharged.  He completed 4 years of  creditable active service.  His DD Form 214, showed that he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal bronze clasp w/3 loops, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross w/palm and the Parachutist Badge.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that 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 a opposing foreign force, or while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in armed conflict against and opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.  The required gallantry, while or a lesser degree than that required for the Distinguished Service Cross, must nevertheless 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.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) also provides, in pertinent part, that 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.

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.  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 this requirement.

2.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s records, nor has the applicant provided any evidence to support his allegations.

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

__vbc___  __jea___  __ewl___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000037893	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000620	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0002	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.