IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  16 April 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130013643 


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: 

* reconsideration of his previous request for a second award of the Air Medal
* a personal appearance before the Board
* information regarding the existence and location of Firebase Gettysburg

2.  He also requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show in:

   a.  item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) – two additional unit awards
   
b.  in item 30 (Remarks):

* "wounded in action"
* 14 years of civilian education
* "universal blood donor"

3.  The applicant states he strongly believes his amended DD Form 214 should reflect the requested additional information. 

	a.  He provides additional argument in support of his request for a second award of the Air Medal by outlining various events in which he states he accumulated numerous hours of flight time.  He also asks if he should return the second Air Medal if the Board does not approve his request for this award.

	b.  He states his uniform has two ribbons above the right pocket that are not listed on his DD Form 214.  He describes these ribbons as a blue ribbon with a gold outline determined to be a "Presidential Citation" and an unknown ribbon which is quite similar to the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, only it is lacking the palm.

	c.  He also states he was wounded in action in Vietnam and it is not documented on his DD Form 214.  He states it is, however, documented in his medical records as an accident.  He outlines the details of the event and provides testimonials in support of his contentions.  He states while patrolling in an area with enemy activity in Long An Province a flare exploded that resulted in an injury to his right leg.  He was attended by a medic.  Later doctors cleaned and stitched the injury.  
   
   d.  He states he graduated from a 2-year vocational technical college in 1968.
   
   e.  He further states he was a "universal blood donor" in Vietnam which should be annotated in item 30 of his DD Form 214.

4.  He provides: 

* personal statement
* two copies of the DD Form 214 in question
* DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214)
* Standard Form (SF) 600 (Health Record - Chronological Record of Medical Care) 
* squad leader statement
* platoon sergeant statement
* statements from three other platoon members
* Electronics Technology Diploma

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) sets forth procedures for processing requests for correction of military records.  Paragraph 2-15b governs requests for reconsideration.  This provision of the regulation allows an applicant to request reconsideration of an earlier ABCMR decision if the request is received within 
1 year of the ABCMR's original decision and it has not previously been reconsidered.  In ABCMR Docket Number AR20110009911, dated 6 December 2011, the Board denied the applicant's request for a second award of the Air Medal.  His request for reconsideration was not received within 1 year of the ABCMR's original decision; therefore, the portion of his application pertaining to the Air Medal will not be discussed further in these Proceedings.  The applicant should note that the ABCMR will not consider any further requests for reconsideration of this matter.  However, he has the option to seek relief in a court of appropriate jurisdiction.

2.  The ABCMR does not maintain records on the location of Army installations in combat zones.  As such, the applicant's request for information regarding the existence and location of Fire Base Gettysburg will not be further discussed in this record of proceedings. 

3.  On 11 December 1968, he was inducted into the Army of the United States.

4.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows in: 

* item 31 (Foreign Service) – he was credited with service in Vietnam beginning 9 June 1969 with a date eligible to return from overseas of 14 July 1970
* item 32 (Civilian Education) – United Electronics School, 1968
* item 38 (Record of Assignments) – he was assigned to Company A, 5th Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, 9th Infantry Division, as an infantryman from 9 June 1969 to 12 July 1970
* item 40 (Wounds) – no identified battle wounds

5.  On 13 July 1970, he was honorably released from active duty due to early separation of overseas returnees.  He completed 1 year, 7 months, and 3 days of creditable active service.  His DD Form 214, as amended by a DD Form 215, shows he was awarded or authorized the following:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device
* Army Commendation Medal (3rd Award) with "V" Device
* Army Good Conduct Medal
* Air Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal with four bronze service stars
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960) 
* Valorous Unit Award
* RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation (2nd Award)
* RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation (2nd Award)
* Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14)
* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16)

6.  His DD Form 214 further shows in item 30:

* Blood Grp – O+
* Civ Ed – 12 YEARS
* RVN – 9JUN69-12JUL70 

7.  On two previous occasions the Board denied the applicant's request for correction of his record to show he was injured as a result of hostile action and that his record should reflect the Purple Heart. 

	a.  In its first consideration of his request for award of the Purple Heart, the Board concluded that medical evidence of record showed he was accidentally injured on 7 September 1969 in Vietnam, not as a result of hostile action.  This is reflected on a Standard Form 600 (Health Record - Chronological Record of Medical Care).

   b.  In that case the applicant had outlined the events that transpired on the day he was injured.  He stated the men of his unit had formed a line in which ammunition was passed up to an ambush location.  In the process, "a flare was either dropped with the detonator fixed to fire or during a transfer of some sort, a flare was detonated."  This flare wounded him in the leg.

   c.  The applicant provided a statement from an individual who identified himself as the applicant's former unit's radio telephone operator and a statement from an individual who identified himself as the applicant's former unit's ammunition bearer.  These individuals confirmed the applicant's contention that when ammunition was being passed out, a flare blew up and injured the applicant.

	d.  The statements provided by the applicant only confirmed that he was accidently injured when handling ammunition.  The unit was not engaged with the enemy at the time.  The unit was not attacking or being attacked by the enemy.

	e.  There is no evidence in his service personnel record which shows he was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action in Vietnam.

8.  He now contends he was injured by a flare that exploded when it was hit by either a bullet or shrapnel.  He states he was hit in the right leg and it was bleeding badly.  He was attended by their medic and put on a departing helicopter.  The doctors cleaned and stitched him up.  He also provides statements from individuals who identified themselves as his squad leader and platoon sergeant attesting to his being injured while their company was engaged with the enemy.   

9.  His name does not appear on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.

10.  He provides an Electronics Technology Diploma, dated 15 November 1968.  This document does not show the length of the course.

11.  Review of the applicant's official military personnel file did not reveal that he was authorized any additional awards beyond those already listed on his amended DD Form 214.

12.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations – Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  The version in effect at the time stated the "Remarks" section would be used to complete entries too long for their respective blocks.  It stated to:

* enter blood group, e.g., "Blood Group 0"
* enter the highest civilian education level attained

13.  Army Regulation 670-1 (Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia) states a unit award is given to an operating unit and is worn by members of that unit who participated in the cited action.  Personnel who did not participate in the cited action, but who are assigned in the cited unit, are authorized temporary wear of some unit awards.  U.S. unit awards authorized for wear on Army uniforms include the Presidential Unit Citation, Joint Meritorious Unit Award, Valorous Unit Award, Meritorious Unit Commendation, and Army Superior Unit Award.

14.  Army Regulation 15-185 governs operations of the ABCMR.  Paragraph 2-11 of this regulation states that applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR.  The regulation provides that the Director of the ABCMR or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing before which the applicant, counsel, and witnesses may appear whenever justice requires.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant has requested a personal appearance before the Board, there is sufficient evidence available for a fair and impartial consideration of his case without such an appearance.

2.  A review of his military record and other sources did not reveal that he was authorized any additional awards beyond those already listed on his amended DD Form 214.  It appears the two ribbons in question were authorized for his wear only during his assignment to a unit that received those awards for a period during which he was not assigned to that unit.  Therefore, there is an insufficient basis for adding any additional awards to his DD Form 214.

3.  There was no provision at the time and currently is no provision for an entry on the DD Form 214 showing "wounded in action."  Moreover, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to show he was wounded as a result of hostile action.  Therefore, he is not entitled to have this entry added to his DD Form 214. 

4.  There is no provision for an entry on the DD Form 214 showing "universal blood donor."  Therefore, he is not entitled to have this entry added to his DD Form 214. 

5.  He provides an Electronics Technology Diploma, dated 15 November 1968.  However, this document does not show the length of the course.  As such, it would not be appropriate to change item 30 to show 14 years of civilian education.

6.  In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient basis for granting the applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X____  ____X____  ____X____  DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      ____________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)                                         AR20130013643



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130013643



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1