RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01167
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 OCTOBER 2007
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to reflect award of the Purple Heart (PH) and
compensation.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
During a combat mission a piece of shrapnel hit his ankle and knocked
out his heated flying suit and as a result his leg froze.
In support of his application, applicant provided copies of documents
from his personnel records, news articles, a letter to Senator Kennedy
and Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) decision letter.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The servicemember’s records reflect he served on active duty in the
Army of the United States (AUS) from 23 October 1942 through
4 September 1945.
The servicemember’s WG AGO 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of
Separation Honorable Discharge reflects he was awarded the Air Medal
with five Oak Leaf Clusters (AM w/5 OLCs) and the Good Conduct Medal
(GCM).
The applicant is receiving a 10 percent disability rating from DVA for
service connected disability for residuals of frostbite of the right
lower extremity.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the requested relief be denied. DPPPR states
the PH is awarded for wounds received as a direct result of enemy
actions (i.e., gunshot or shrapnel wounds, hand-to-hand combat wounds,
forced aircraft bail out injuries, etc.) In addition, it is necessary
that the wound have required or received treatment by medical
personnel. Indirect injuries do not meet the criteria for award of
the PH.
DPPPR further states an eyewitness statement was not provided to help
validate the applicant’s request for the PH. There is no
documentation in the applicant records to substantiate the applicant’s
injury was a result of enemy action.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states he never
submitted a document that listed the injury as non-battle.
There are no eyewitnesses available because when he was released from
the hospital, he reported to the Flight Surgeon, because his crew was
flying out the next day. The Flight Surgeon told him to stay grounded
for a little while. The next day his crew was shot down, six went
down with the plan; one died in prison camp and since then the others
have passed on (Exhibit E).
_________________________________________________________________
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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of an error or an injustice. We took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;
however, we agree with the opinion and the recommendation of the Air
Force and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
servicemember has not been the victim of an error or an injustice.
The documentation provided by the applicant and the limited military
records do not substantiate he had an injury that met the criteria for
award of the PH; nor has he provided any evidence to substantiate the
request for award of the PH, such as an eyewitness statement
validating the incident relating to the injuries. While we are not
unmindful or unappreciative of the applicant’s service to his Nation,
in the absence of evidence substantiating the servicemember was
injured as a direct result of enemy action, we find no compelling
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the
application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board this application in Executive
Session on 14 September 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2006-01167 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Apr 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Available Military Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, 21 Jun 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Jun 06.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 7 Jul 06, w/atchs.
WAYNE R. GRACIE
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00969
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should be awarded the PH as a result of injuries he received when his aircraft crashed landed due to undercarriage battle damage from enemy anti- aircraft positions during the mission. Since his records reflect that his injuries were incurred in the line of duty as a result of an aviation accident, we find no basis upon which to recommend correcting his records to indicate that he was wounded...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00917
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the PH be denied. The PH is awarded for wounds received as a direct result of enemy action, such as, gunshot, or shrapnel wound, hand-to-hand combat wounds, forced aircraft bail out injuries, etc. The documentation provided by the applicant and his military records do not substantiate he had an injury that met the criteria for award of the PH.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02907
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the PH be denied and states, in part, to be awarded the PH, a member must provide a detailed personal account, certified eyewitness statements, and medical documentation to show the wound received treatment by medical personnel and occurred as a direct result of enemy action. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. On 6 Oct 06,...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2003-03616
Furthermore, his medical records indicate that he had an operation. Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for award of the DFC and states, in part, that there is no evidence he was recommended for, or awarded the DFC. Should the applicant provide additional statements containing specific details regarding his...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03619
In support of his application, the applicant submits a copy of his WD AGO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation – Honorable Discharge, an eyewitness statement, his personal statement, a historical account of the mission, and a Board of Veterans’ Appeal Order. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00236
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00236 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 JUL 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Purple Heart (PH). The applicant submitted an application dated 19 March 1982 requesting award of the PH. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01984
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01984 INDEX CODE: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect entitlement to the Purple Heart (PH). In accordance with Army Regulation (AR) 600-45, Decorations, dated 22 Sep 43, during the period in question, the PH was awarded for wounds received in...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00535
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the PH be denied. They state the PH is awarded for wounds received as a direct result of enemy action and the wounds must have received treatment by medical personnel. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 May 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-01155-2
In a letter to the Secretary of the Air Force, dated 24 February 2006, the applicant requested reconsideration of his request; however, on 20 March 2006, he was advised that his request did not meet the criteria for reconsideration by the Board (Exhibits I and J). The AFRBA Senior Legal Advisor opinion, with attachment, is at Exhibit P. AFPC/DPPPR has reevaluated the evidence of record and the documentation provided by applicant, and still supports the 2005 AFPHRB decision to...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00456
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the PH be denied. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or an injustice. The applicant stated he received...