IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  4 February 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140010507 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show award of an Arrowhead Device and all other awards he is authorized.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he received two Air Medals for being on a total of 50 aerial combat missions.  He believes he is therefore eligible for the Arrowhead Device.

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Form 214
* two citations with award certificates
* General orders (GO)

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 March 1969.  After completing initial training, he was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).  The highest rank/grade held while on active duty was specialist four/E-4.

3.  His DD Form 214 shows he was honorably released from active duty on 22 January 1971.  He completed 1 year, 10 months, and 20 days of total creditable active service.  He was awarded or authorized:

* Air Medal (2nd Award)
* Army Commendation Medal
* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with the Rifle Bar 

4.  His DD Form 214 also shows he served in Vietnam during the period 4 August 1969 to 3 August 1970.  He has qualifying service for four campaigns:

* Vietnam Summer - Fall 1969 (9 June 1969 to 31 October 1969)
* Vietnam Winter - Spring 1970 (1 November 1969 to 30 April 1970)
* Sanctuary Counteroffensive (1 May 1970 to 30 June 1970)
* Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VII (1 July 1970 to 30 June 1971)

5.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), item 38 (Record of Assignments) shows he was assigned to two units while in Vietnam:

* Company D, 1st Battalion, 26th Infantry Regiment
* Company A, 3rd Battalion, 21st Infantry Regiment

6.  His DA Form 20 also shows in item 38 his conduct and efficiency was “excellent” throughout his active service.  There is no evidence of any derogatory or disciplinary actions against the applicant or a commander's disqualification that would have precluded him from being recommended for or awarded the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM).

7.  GO Number 5351, dated 1 June 1970, issued by Headquarters, Americal Division awarded the applicant the Purple Heart for wounds sustained on 18 May 1970.
8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides policy and guidance for awards and decorations.  It states:

	a.  A bronze service star will be awarded for wear on the Vietnam Service Medal for participation in each campaign.

	b.  The arrowhead is a bronze replica of an Indian arrowhead.  It denotes participating in a combat parachute jump, helicopter assault landing, combat glider landing, or amphibious assault landing.  A Soldier must actually exit the aircraft to receive assault credit.  Individual assault credit is tied directly to the combat assault credit decision for the unit to which the Soldier is attached or assigned at the time of the assault.  Should a unit be denied assault credit, no assault credit will accrue to the individual Soldiers of that unit.  

9.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, stated the AGCM may be awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940; for first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  The enlisted person must have had all “excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings.  There must have been no convictions by a court-martial.

10.  Department of the Army Pamphlet (DA Pam) 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the awards received by units serving in Vietnam.  

	a.  This pamphlet shows all units in Vietnam were awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 8, dated 1974.

	b.  It also shows the 1st Battalion, 26th Infantry Regiment was awarded, in DAGO 53, 1970, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation for the period October 1965 to 7 April 1970.  

	c.  Paragraph 7 lists all assault landing credits for which the Arrowhead Device can be awarded.  For Vietnam, it shows only one qualifying assault landing: an airborne assault in the vicinity of Katum, Vietnam between 0900 and 0907 hours on 22 February 1967.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests award of the Arrowhead Device, contending his participation in 50 aerial combat missions qualify him for the award.  However, DA Pam 672-3 only identifies one qualifying air assault, an airborne operation occurring on 22 February 1967 to be awarded the Arrowhead Device.  The applicant would have had to be assigned to a participating unit at the time of the airborne assault and given participation credit.  The applicant was not in Vietnam at that time.

2.  Records also show the applicant:

* was awarded the Purple Heart
* received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings for each duty assignment and there is no record of a commander's disqualification for award of the AGCM; therefore, it would be appropriate to award this medal for the period 3 March 1969 to 22 January 1971 and add the AGCM to his DD Form 214
* participated in four campaigns that entitled him to four bronze service stars for wear on his already-awarded VSM
* he was a member of the 1st Battalion, 26th Infantry Regiment when it was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation
* all units in Vietnam were cited for award of the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation during his period of assignment

3.  Based upon the foregoing, his request for award of the Arrowhead Device should not be granted, but those awards and decorations noted above should be awarded and reflected on his DD Form 214.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___x____  ____x___  ____x___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  deleting the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars from his DD Form 214,
	b.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period
3 March 1969 to 22 January 1971, and

	c.  adding to his DD Form 214 the following awards:

* Purple Heart
* Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award)
* Vietnam Service Medal with four bronze service stars
* Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation
* Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends
denial of so much of the application that pertains to the award of the Arrowhead Device.




      _______ _   _x______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140010507



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140010507



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1