RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-00820

            INDEX NUMBER:  107.00; 108.03; 108.08

            COUNSEL:  CHARLES F. EDDINGS

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Purple Heart and the Distinguished Flying Cross  (DFC);
and that Block 15 of his retirement order be changed to read “Yes”  which
would indicate his disability was received in  the  line  of  duty  as  a
direct result of armed conflict or was caused by  an  instrumentality  of
war and incurred in the line of duty during a period of war, rather  than
retirement by reason of physical disability at a  compensable  rating  of
70%.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Because of administrative error, award  of  the  DFC  was  omitted.   His
superior failed to submit a recommendation for award of the Purple Heart,
because he was ignorant of the criteria for this award.   His  retirement
order should be changed to read “Yes” in  Block 15.

In support  of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  a  DD  Form  293,
Application for Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the  Armed  Forces,
which lists the issues he wants the Board to address; a Unit Citation for
the 454th Bombardment Group, dated 24 Mar 45, for outstanding performance
of duty in armed conflict with the  enemy;  a  statement  from  his  non-
commissioned officer in charge (NCOIC), endorsed by the commander,  dated
28 Mar 94, concerning award of the Purple Heart; a request  for  military
records, dated 28 Mar 94; a letter from the 15th  Air  Force  Association
(AFA),  dated  8  Mar  99,  addressed  to  AFMPC/DPMAS  transmitting  the
applicant’s request; his letter indicating some of his records  had  been
found and his belief that his arthritis was caused by a drug he  received
during treatment; a document from his medical record, dated  29  Jan  44,
concerning his hospital admission for a concussion incurred on 25 Jan  44
during authorized boxing; and his letter  to  the  Review  Boards  Office
(SAF/MIBR) explaining he requested the DFC through the Disabled  American
Veterans (DAV) and the Purple Heart through the AFA.

The applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The following chronology has been extracted from the  applicant's  master
personnel records and his Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) records:

The applicant was inducted into the Army Air Corps  on  13  Sep  43.   He
entered on active duty on 4 Oct 43, and was honorably  discharged  on  27
Jun 45.  He participated in the European,  African,  and  Middle  Eastern
Theater of Operations.  During this period, he was awarded the Air  Medal
and 3 Oak Leaf Clusters on 29 Oct 44, 1 Mar 45, 16 Apr 45, and 1 Jun  45,
respectively.

He enlisted in the Air Force  Reserve,  effective  24  Jan  51,  and  was
honorably discharged on 11 Dec 52.  He also received the Air Medal on  14
Aug 52. He enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 Dec 52, for  a  period
of 6 years.  He continued to reenlist, contracting his last enlistment on
9 Feb 67.  He was promoted to the grade of SMSgt, effective 1 Apr 67.

On 4 Mar 68, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was  convened  to  consider
the applicant's case for the purpose of  continued  active  duty.   After
reviewing the record, the MEB rendered the following diagnoses:  "Sensory
neural hearing loss, etiology unknown, rule out acoustic trauma, does not
require hearing aid, medicines or surgery," and “Osteoarthritis involving
the hands, knees, feet and cervical spine.”  The board recommended return
to duty with a waiver.

On 7 January 69, the applicant underwent a physical examination  for  the
purpose of retirement  for  length  of  service.   After  evaluating  the
applicant’s conditions, the  examining  physician  recommended  that  the
applicant’s case be referred for consideration  by  an  MEB  and  that  a
decision  concerning  his  physical  qualification  for   retirement   or
continued service be deferred.

On 7 Feb 69, an MEB was again convened to consider the applicant's  case.
After reviewing the record, the MEB  rendered  the  following  diagnoses:
"Osteoarthritis, generalized, since  1961,"  and  “Deafness,  high  tone,
sensorioneural, severe, moderate in speech frequencies  bilateral,  cause
undetermined, since 1968.”

On 13 Feb 69, a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) convened to consider  the
applicant's case.  After reviewing  the  record,  the  PEB  rendered  the
following   diagnoses:    "Degenerative   arthritis,   multiple   joints,
disabling, permanent," rated at  20%,  and  “Neurosensory  hearing  loss,
bilateral, permanent,” rated at 10%.  The board found that the  applicant
was unfit because of physical disability;  the  disability  was  incurred
while entitled to receive basic pay; and the disability was  incurred  in
time of war or national emergency.  It did not find that  the  disability
was the direct result of armed conflict or  that  it  was  caused  by  an
instrumentality of war in the line of duty during a period of  war.   The
PEB recommended permanent retirement at a compensable  disability  rating
of 30%.

On 11 Mar 69, a  PEB  was  again  convened  and  rendered  the  following
diagnoses:  "Degenerative arthritis  (mixed  type)  involving  the  right
shoulder,  wrists,  hands,  knees,  lumbar-sacral   spine,   feet,   with
limitation of motion in right shoulder (major), lumbar spine, right ankle
(moderate), permanent--no," combined rating  of  35%,  and  “Neurosensory
hearing loss, bilateral, permanent,” rated at 10%.  The board found  that
the applicant was unfit because of physical disability and the disability
was incurred while entitled to receive basic pay.  It did not  find  that
the disability was the direct result of armed conflict or was  caused  by
an instrumentality of war in the line of duty during a period of war;  or
that  the  disability  was  permanent.   The  PEB  recommended  temporary
disability retirement at a compensable disability rating of 40%.   On  24
Mar 69, the Air Force Physical Review Council (AFPRC) concurred with  the
findings of the PEB in the ultimate disposition of the  case  but  raised
the rating to 60%.  On 26 Mar 69, the Air Force  Personnel  Board  (AFPB)
concurred in the findings and recommendations of the AFPRC.

On 31 Aug 69, the applicant was relieved from active duty  and  his  name
was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL),  effective  1
Sep 69, in the grade of SMSgt with a  compensable  disability  rating  of
60%.  It was determined that the disability was not received in the  line
of  duty  as  a  direct  result  of  armed  conflict  or  caused  by   an
instrumentality of war and incurred in the line of duty during  a  period
of war.  He had served 20 years, 1 month and 13 days on active duty.

On 19 Feb 71, a Formal PEB (FPEB) was  convened  for  the  purpose  of  a
periodic physical evaluation.  It  rendered  diagnoses  of  "Degenerative
joint disease" and “Neurosensory hearing loss.”  The board found that the
applicant was unfit because of physical disability,  the  disability  was
not permanent, and the disability was incurred while entitled to  receive
basic pay.  The FPEB recommended retention on the TDRL at  a  compensable
disability rating of 50%.  The AFPRC concurred but raised the  rating  to
60%.  On 25 Feb 71, the applicant signed a statement indicating  that  he
did not agree with the findings and submitted a rebuttal.

On  28  Aug  72,  a  PEB  was  convened.   It  rendered  a  diagnosis  of
“Generalized osteoarthritis, with chronic pain.”  The  board  recommended
permanent retirement with a compensable disability rating of 30%.

On 5 Oct 72, an FPEB was convened for the purpose of a periodic  physical
evaluation.  It rendered diagnoses of "Generalized  osteoarthritis,  with
chronic pain, permanent," with a combined rating  of  57%,  and  “Chronic
prostatitis, moderate,” rated at 10%.  The board found that the applicant
was unfit because of physical disability, the disability  was  permanent,
and the disability was incurred while entitled to receive basic pay.   It
did not find that the disability was the direct result of armed  conflict
or was caused by an instrumentality of war in the line of duty  during  a
period of war; or that the disability was permanent.  The PEB recommended
permanent retirement at a compensable  disability  rating  of  60%.   The
applicant concurred with the findings and recommendations of the PEB on 5
October 1972.

On 18 Oct 72, the AFPRC  supplemented  the  PEB’s  diagnoses  to  include
diagnoses of “Spine, cervical, limitation of motion, moderate, permanent”
with a rating of 20%, and “Chronic prostatitis, moderate, permanent” with
a rating of 10%.  The AFPRC concurred with the recommended disposition in
the case but recommended an increase in the compensable disability rating
to 70%.

On 18 Oct  72,  the  Secretary  of  the  Air  Force  (SAF)  approved  the
recommendation of the AFPRC and the applicant’s name was removed from the
TDRL, effective 8 Nov 72.  He was permanently retired  in  the  grade  of
SMSgt with a compensable disability rating of 70 percent.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Recognition Programs Branch,  reviewed  this  application  and
recommended denial.  To be  awarded  the  Purple  Heart,  a  member  must
provide documentation to support he was wounded as  a  direct  result  of
enemy action.  Indirect injuries  do  not  meet  Purple  Heart  criteria.
Indirect injuries include but are  not  limited  to  diseases,  exposure,
injuries received while seeking shelter from mortar  or  rocket  attacks,
aircraft bombings, grenades, and injuries incurred while  serving  as  an
aircraft member or passenger  as  a  result  of  the  aircraft’s  evasive
measures against hostile fire.  The injury  received  must  also  require
medical treatment  by  medical  personnel.   The  applicant’s  eyewitness
testimony  stating  that  he  suffered  lacerations  of  the  hand  as  a
consequence of an emergency landing when on a  combat  mission  indicates
the applicant’s injuries did not occur as a direct result of the enemy.

Regarding award of the DFC, prior to  14  Aug  43,  this  decoration  was
awarded on the basis of 35 missions of  operational  flight  against  the
enemy.  After this time, a recommendation for the  Air  Medal  (sic  DFC)
changed from a nomination to a fully justified  recommendation  submitted
by an immediate supervisor or someone  other  than  the  member  who  had
firsthand knowledge of the act or achievement.  The  applicant’s  records
show  his  missions  totalled  34,  with  no  indication  of  a   written
recommendation for the award.

There is no evidence in the  applicant’s  medical  records  that  he  was
injured as a direct result of enemy action.  Documentation in his records
indicates his injuries were received during an emergency landing  of  the
aircraft.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Counsel reviewed the advisory opinion and stated the  applicant’s  injury
was the result of damage to the aircraft by enemy flak during a bomb run,
and, therefore, was a  direct  result  of  enemy  action  which  required
medical treatment by medical personnel.  With respect  to  the  DFC,  the
applicant’s request was based on an  act  accomplished  during  a  combat
mission, not on 35 missions.  The applicant made emergency repairs during
flight which enabled an  aircraft  to  return  to  its  home  base.   The
applicant’s supervisor submitted a statement (endorsed  by  the  squadron
commander) that the DFC  he  received  should  have  been  given  to  the
applicant, who made the actual repairs.  Counsel also points out that the
applicant’s request for service-connected disability was not addressed in
the Air Force evaluation.

Counsel’s complete response with attachments is at Exhibit D.

___________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed  this  application  and  recommended
denial.  The applicant served on an  aircrew  and  experienced  a  forced
landing after his plane was struck by enemy fire.  He  suffered  multiple
fractures which healed and allowed him to complete a full 20-year  career
upon his return to service.  In his late 40’s,  the  applicant  developed
significant osteoarthritis  for  multiple  joints  which  still  did  not
prevent him from completing his career.  This disease did not  relate  to
injuries he suffered in WWII, and disability evaluation  through  Medical
and Physical Evaluation Boards determined that his osteoarthritis,  along
with service-incurred bilateral hearing loss, warranted  placing  him  on
the TDRL at a 60% disability rating, which he received for 3 years  until
being permanently retired on 8 Nov 72, apparently at a 70% rating.

Records show that the applicant developed arthritis while on active duty,
thereby making him eligible for disability compensation and VA  benefits.
Records do not show  that  the  generalized  arthritis  which  brought  a
determination of a 70% disability rating was in any  way  connected  with
his war-time experiences.  Osteoarthritis is a disease for which no cause
is known and is typically found in most individuals  to  some  degree  as
they age.  While previous joint injury can lead to later  arthritis,  the
wide-spread nature of the applicant’s findings cannot  be  attributed  to
previous injuries.

A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit
F.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Counsel reviewed  the  advisory  opinion  and  stated  that  the  Medical
Consultant’s evaluation is reminiscent of DoD’s position on Agent  Orange
and the Gulf War Syndrome, i.e., to  categorically  deny  any  connection
with  the  onset  of  diseases  and  exposure  to  toxins  found  on  the
battlefield, thereby denying disability retirement.  Counsel asserts that
the arthritis developed  while  on  active  duty;  that  the  applicant’s
injuries could have caused the onset  of  osteoarthritis;  and  that  the
applicant should receive the Purple Heart and the DFC  because  of  those
service-connected injuries.  Counsel’s complete response is at Exhibit H.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the  interest
of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice warranting partial  relief.   In
this respect, we note that the applicant’s eyewitness testimony  supports
his entitlement to the award of the Purple Heart for  injuries  sustained
as a direct result of enemy actions.   Apparently,  while  on  a  bombing
mission in December 1944, the applicant’s aircraft was  damaged  by  flak
and the  bomber  was  forced  to  crash  land,  causing  the  applicant’s
injuries.  We also noted that  the  applicant  did  not  provide  medical
documentation that his injuries required or received treatment by medical
personnel.  However, we are satisfied with the  explanation  provided  by
the applicant, his supervisor and commander, that because he was  treated
at a British Infirmary for the injuries  he  received  during  the  crash
landing, no medical  record  of  his  treatment  exists  in  his  service
records.  Therefore, since we believe the  applicant  has  satisfied  the
criteria for award of the Purple Heart, his records should  be  corrected
to the extent indicated below.

4.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice to warrant award of the DFC.  We
acknowledge the contributions he and the members of his group made to the
war effort.  However, after a thorough review of the evidence  of  record
and applicant’s submission, we agree with the opinion and  recommendation
of the Recognition Programs Branch with respect to award of the  DFC  and
adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the  applicant
is not entitled to this  decoration.   The  applicant,  through  counsel,
states that his request for this award is not  based  on  the  number  of
missions but for an act accomplished during a combat mission.   There  is
no evidence in the applicant’s record to indicate he was ever recommended
for the award, nor do his supporting  statements  suggest  award  of  any
decoration other than the Purple Heart.  Therefore,  in  the  absence  of
clear and convincing evidence that  the  applicant  met  the  established
criteria for award of the DFC or that a written  recommendation  for  the
award was submitted but was not acted upon, this request is not favorably
considered.

5.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice with respect to the  applicant’s
request to change his retirement order to show  his  disability  was  the
direct result of armed conflict or caused by an  instrumentality  of  war
and incurred in the line of duty during a period of war.  We  agree  with
the opinion and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant  and  adopt
the rationale expressed that while the applicant’s medical condition  may
have developed when he was on active duty, the generalized nature of  his
osteoarthritis  cannot  be  attributed  to  his   war-time   experiences.
Therefore, we  find  no  compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  this
request.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military  records  of  the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to  show  that  he  was  awarded  the
Purple Heart for wounds sustained as a  direct  result  of  enemy  action
during a bombing mission in Northern Italy with the 739th Squadron, 454th
Bombardment Group, 15th Air Force, in December 1944.

___________________________________________________________________

The following  members  of  the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 16 November 1999, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
      Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member
      Dr. Gerald B. Kauvar, Member

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Mar 99, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 11 May 99.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 24 May 99.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Counsel, dated 21 Jun 99, w/atchs.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 27 Jul 99.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Jul 99.
     Exhibit H.  Letter, Counsel, dated 20 Aug 99.



                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair


AFBCMR 99-00820




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of
Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed
that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he was awarded the
Purple Heart for wounds sustained as a direct result of enemy action
during a bombing mission in Northern Italy with the 739th Squadron, 454th
Bombardment Group, 15th Air Force, in December 1944.






            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency