Talk:Valorous Unit Award

DUC v PUC
The Distinguished Unit Citation mentioned in the text was a WWII award which quickly became the Presidential Unit Citation (United States). Accordingly, the reference to the DUC really needs verification or explaination.--S. Rich 16:57, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Rich,

Regarding the DUC and PUC, you might wish to note the following:

The Army Distinguished Unit Citation was established in 1942 retroactive to December 7, 1941. The name was not changed to the Presidential Unit Citation until 1966, nearly 25 years later well into the Vietnam War. "Distinguished Unit Citation" (DUC) is the correct designation for those PUC/DUC awards approved prior to November 3, 1966. After that date, "Presidential Unit Citation" (PUC) is correct. The design of the Army (and Army Air Forces/USAF) PUC/DUC ribbon did not change (though the modern USAF ribbon appears to have different dimensions). Thus, it would not be correct to refer to a DUC as a PUC, though it does make sense (and would be correct) to note in some way that the awards are the same, which, as I understand it, you were trying to do.

Note also that the Navy PUC should be referred to as a separate award. The 23d (Americal) Division (or parts of it) received both the DUC and the Navy PUC during WWII and the Vietnam War.

Making things more complicated, I don't find evidence that the 23d Division was ever awarded either the PUC/DUC or the Navy PUC at the Division level, but rather various elements within the 23d Division were awarded these and other unit citations in both WWII and the Vietnam War. For instance, according to the unit history at http://www.americal.org/, the DUC was only awarded to Company E, 182nd Infantry Regiment (for actions in the Solomons in 1944). Much of the Division (but I can't tell if all subordinate units were included - I suspect not) was awarded the Navy PUC in 1943 for actions between August and December 9, 1942 on Tulagi, Gavutu, Tanambogo, Florida, and Guadalcanal in the Solomons. Likewise, various subordinate units at various times were awarded the PUC during the Vietnam War (see http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/p672_3.pdf) and separately the Navy PUC, but not the entire Division. A number of subordinate units also received lower ranking unit commendations during the Vietnam War, such as the Valorous Unit Award and Meritorious Unit Citation, and the entire Division received the latter twice: for the period 1 Sep 67–31 Oct 68, and 1 Nov 68–30 Jun 70.

Assuming that it is proper to include on the list of awards for the Division those awarded only to specific subordinate units, the list of awards in the upper right hand box is incomplete as it stands. It should include both the DUC and PUC (usually written PUC/DUC), and the Navy PUC. I suggest you consider editing the box as follows (for an arbitrary example that does not include the Navy PUC, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Special_Operations_Squadron): include jpegs of the unit ribbons and label them, from the top, PUC/DUC; N-PUC (Navy Presidential Unit Citation); VUC; and MUC. Don't deal in the box with the question of whether a particular award was Division level or subordinate unit. Instead, in the text, include a new section "Unit Awards" or "Awards and Decorations", and one line that says something like "The Division and various subordinate units were awarded the following . . . . . . " (along with proper citations, of course). What do you think? If you wish to correspond, you may write to me at david.sciacchitano@verizon.net. Otherwise, good luck! Sciacchitano (talk) 17:56, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Tank and Laurel Wreath?
Why are there little tanks and what I'm assuming are laurel wreaths next to the awards under order of precedence? They don't link to anything and there's no description or citation of their meaning. I'm unaware of anything related to these awards that would warrant these little guys, so if I don't get a response on this in the near future I'll go ahead and take them down. Corkfather (talk) 01:04, 4 April 2017 (UTC)