Award equity - Medal system needs a top-to-bottom upgrade

[thedrifter]

Award equity - Medal system needs a top-to-bottom upgrade
By James Gardiner
Marine Corps Times
Posted : January 22, 2007

A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon," Napoleon said.

With that quote in mind, consider the following: Almost two years ago, I Marine Expeditionary Force conducted a very significant combat tour in Iraq, which included Operation Al Fajr, or Phantom Fury, in Fallujah, Iraq, in late 2004. At the time, I was with MEU Service Support Group 31 supporting operations in Fallujah.

This operation was considered the fiercest urban combat since the battle of Hue City during the Vietnam War. In the aftermath of this operation, several Marines have been awarded the Navy Cross, Silver Star and Bronze Star for valor, along with lesser awards for valor and achievement. Even after two years, several awards are still awaiting approval.

Because of so many significant actions and individual acts of valor, I MEF was written up for the Presidential Unit Citation. This award was downgraded and I MEF was awarded the Navy Unit Commendation. It's a prestigious award in itself, but in the operating forces it's not normally associated with unit achievements that are as notable as I MEF's. The PUC is the holy grail for Marines.

The PUC, according to the Navy and Marine Corps Awards Manual, is awarded "for extraordinary heroism in action against enemy forces," while the NUC is awarded "for exceptionally meritorious (service or achievement) during assigned missions."

As pointed out in a recent article in Leatherneck magazine, which detailed the awarding of the NUC to I MEF, the unit performed at the level of a Silver Star for a unit. The PUC is awarded for actions more closely associated with the Navy Cross.

In the operating forces, the downgrade of this award raised many questions. Several Marines I was directly associated with during this operation asked me why this happened, while a few others questioned who made the decision. Truth be told, I felt that the downgrade was based on the quality of the "write-up," not on the actual actions performed by I MEF.

In an attempt to better understand how this could have happened and to better understand the awards process, I went on a quest for knowledge so that I could communicate that information to as many Marines as possible.

I began by reading the Navy and Marine Corps Awards Manual. I found a lot of great information, but no real answers. Then, I contacted the Awards Branch at Marine Corps headquarters for the truth. I knew I could trust them; they are the experts. They told me they didn't know why it was downgraded. [An official familiar with the awarding process would not discuss where in the chain of command it was downgraded.]

Someone else in Awards Branch later told me that the method the Marine Corps uses is a "time-tested method that ensures that individuals or units receive the appropriate award based on their actions, not on the writing skills of the originator."

I assembled five other senior staff noncommissioned officers, each with many years of experience. I presented the facts to them and asked their opinions. They had the feeling that I MEF was not awarded the PUC because it had already received it for actions during the initial spring 2003 invasion. They also felt that it wasn't seen as politically correct to award it to the same unit twice. I agreed with them.

I venture to say that most of us agree that the method we use is solid and that it has met the test of time. Every Marine who has received an award, or written an award for another, understands that our awards system contains many checks and balances. We also acknowledge and appreciate why we painstakingly analyze awards prior to their being conferred on Marines or units, to ensure that the medals are what they deserve.

But we must also be honest. In some cases, disparities do exist. This case points that out, if nothing else. If this combat was the fiercest urban combat since Vietnam, then why did the units that fought not receive the highest unit commendation? Other examples of disparities include: units that are assigned quotas for awards, awards that are based on the rank of the individual, and Marines who are awarded two medals for the same action (one as an award while in theater and one for end of tour). Finally, we spoke about the award boards themselves and how they're staffed. Normally, they are made up of Marines who were not necessarily involved in any part of the operation or mission that is being reviewed.

We explored the disparities that dictate how we award individuals, both enlisted and officer. One example is an enlisted Marine who received a Meritorious Service Medal while an officer received a Bronze Star, both in a combat zone, both for similar outstanding achievement. If the Meritorious Service Medal equivalent is the Bronze Star for meritorious achievement in a combat zone, then why are we not awarding the enlisted Marine the Bronze Star? Perception is reality in this case.

Yes, our system has served us over a long period of time, but maybe, just maybe, it's time to look at things that might improve the system. Based on lessons learned from operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, I think we can improve. I sat down with some of my counterparts again, and we brainstormed. Here are just a few suggestions to better communicate the awards process and to improve the awards system:

First, let's look at making all information about pending awards available to all Marines. Why do we have it locked away on a Web site where very few Marines actually have access? Allow every Marine to view the awards online. Keep the privileges for writing and changing data contained on the Web site the same, but allow all Marines to view the information. This goes with honor. We're proud of our accomplishments; publish them for every Marine to view and possibly emulate.

Second, get rid of any quota system for awards. If you have 100 hard-chargers who rate a medal, award them what they deserve and carry on. Don't lower the standard of the award. Recognize those who deserve recognition. Get rid of end-of-tour awards - they hurt morale.

Third, don't double-dip awards. If a Marine gets a significant award for an operation while a member of a unit, don't award him again when he moves upstairs or across the hall a few months later for the end of tour.

Fourth, when a board or individual downgrades an award, they should immediately publish that information to the recipients. Don't wait several months or even a year after it's been downgraded to inform the force. Remember that "bad news doesn't get better with age."

Fifth, educate the operating force on how the awards system works, cradle to grave. In my 26 years, I thought I had a good understanding of how the awards system worked. I was incorrect. If that's true in my case, what about all those who also believe they know it?

During my search for information, I spoke to the Staff Noncommissioned Officer Academy academics office and asked what they taught our best and brightest. As I suspected, we teach our Marines how to write or check awards, based on which course they are attending. We never talk about the actual process. This training should be added to each course. If we empower our staff NCOs with this knowledge at their appropriate professional military education schools, we can charge them with educating the force when they return to their units.

Finally, not for a second should anyone who reads this think I'm proposing doing business like anyone else, be it the Army, Navy or Air Force. If they want to give out 10,000 Bronze Stars for a campaign or operation, good for them. The Marine Corps will keep its standards high, and by doing that, we should eliminate the need to award a certain medal only to a certain rank. In other words, if a lance corporal performs at a level that warrants recognition with a Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal, then award that Marine what he earned, don't downgrade the award because of his rank.

I understand that these views may not be popular or politically correct, and some of you may be saying that I am crazy for addressing them in an open forum. I say to you that it's time to correct the awards system. If you agree with what I'm suggesting, then do what you can to communicate the need for change.

The writer is a master gunnery sergeant with Logistics Modernization Team East.

[OLE SARG]

From my experience, you can bet there was some brass in that group who got the BSM and/or above for just being "in the theater"!!!!! All Services need a medal/awards makeover. Whats' good for the goose is good for the gander!!!!!
SEMPER FI,

[drumcorpssnare]

If the powers that be, would just set aside the politics and the BS...it would be simple.
If ya earned it...ya get it.
drumcorpssnare

[Sgt Leprechaun]

Maaan...don't even get me started on this one. As a military collecting 'geeky' type who reads ribbon racks as a hobby, I've seen more "Meritorous" Bronze Stars on officers than I care to remember.

In Vietnam, they called it the "Field Grade Good Conduct Medal".

I've reached the point as a history researcher that unless a BSM has a "V" on it, I don't give it a second glance.

Nowadays, you have to be a major screwup NOT to get something when you retire, usually the Meritorous Service Medal. It has a pretty pink and white ribbon. (No kidding).

Officers usually get the "Legion of Merit", "Distinguised Service Medal" or some such.

All that having been said, it takes someone really able to articulate, in writing, a valor award for an Enlisted LCpl or Cpl. Not to say it doesn't happen, because it does, but awards boards are very, very, stingy when it comes to awarding out those medals.

Finally, do you know what most Marines who saw heavy, holy crap 'katie bar the door' hand to hand combat got, if they survived the Pacific Campaign? Usually, those Marines are discharged with 3, sometimes 4, ribbons. IF they were lucky. 3 of those ribbons were campaign medals (American Campaign, Asiatic Pacific Campaign, WWII Victory Medal). Sometimes, you'll see the PUC on a ribbon bar, most often, not.

Army soldiers coming back from, say, D-Day or even the entire European Campaign had a similiar 'rack'.

Korea? Same thing. Three ribbons/medals. Korean Service, National Defense, UN Service.

The proliferation of medals to officers came about, for the most part, during Vietnam and after.

[FistFu68]

THE COMBAT ACTION RIBBON SPEAK'S FOR ITSELF!HELL, MEDAL'S DON'T FEED THE BULLDOG!!! OOHRAH~SEMPER~FIDELIS!!!