RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02708
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His record be changed to show he was awarded the Purple Heart Medal
(PHM).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
In November 1972 while assigned to Ben Hoa Airbase, South Vietnam, he
came under small arms fire and a mortar attack while working at the
end of a runway. As he sought shelter from enemy fire, he heard a
small explosion and consequently fell to the ground tearing cartilage
and dislocating his right knee. He sought immediate medical care and
was transferred to Royal Air Force (RAF) Lakenheath, United Kingdom
for further medical treatment. He feels his knee injury occurred due
to being under hostile fire. His right knee is now completely
debilitated and he is confined to a wheelchair. The Department of
Veteran’s Affairs (DVA) has granted him a 100% service-connected
disability rating.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided personal
statements, copies of his DD Form 214, Report of Separation From
Active Duty and pertinent copies of his DVA paperwork.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on 19 April 1971.
He was progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant with a date of
rank (DOR) of 1 March 1973. He served a tour in Vietnam during his
two years, three months, and one day of service for pay. He was
honorably discharged from the Air Force on 19 July 1973 in the grade
of sergeant.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The AFBCMR Medical consultant states review of the service medical
records show the applicant incurred a right knee injury and twice
underwent right knee surgery prior to serving in Vietnam. There is no
evidence of new cartilage tear or dislocation of the knee or other
knee injury while serving in Vietnam. The applicant did not undergo
repeat knee surgery upon return from Vietnam as he states. Further,
the circumstances he claims caused a knee injury are indirect and do
not qualify for award of the PHM. Action and disposition in this case
are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force
directives that implement the law. The BCMR Medical Consultant is of
the opinion that no change in the records is warranted.
The remaining pertinent medical facts are contained in the evaluation
prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
16 March 2007 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date,
this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law
or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the AFBCMR
Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or
injustice. According to his medical records, the applicant injured
his knee twice prior to entering the service and underwent surgery
once. There is no evidence of a new cartilage tear or dislocation of
the knee or other knee injury while serving in Vietnam nor does the
record show he underwent repeat knee surgery upon his return from
Vietnam. Furthermore, criteria for award of the PH indicate that
indirect injuries received while seeking shelter from mortar or rocket
attacks do not qualify for award of the PH. Therefore, in the absence
of evidence to the contrary, 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 considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-02708 in Executive Session on 16 August 2007, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. B. J. White-Olson, Panel Chair
Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Aug 08, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 5 Mar 07.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Dec 06.
B. J. WHITE-OLSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00968
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: After a thorough review of his military personnel record, AFPC/DPPPR was unable to verify his entitlement to the PHM and therefore recommends denial of his request for award of the PHM. DPPPR’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSO addresses the applicant’s request for award of the CIB. DPSO’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01298
In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement, a copy of a letter to his Congresswoman and a letter from AFPC/DPMSAA denying the applicant award of the PH Medal. He did not provide medical documentation that he was treated for injuries as a result of the bombing raid. The DPPPRA’s evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states the letter in his records...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04396
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While serving in Nha Trang Air Base, Republic of Vietnam, he was injured while seeking cover during a mortar attack. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicants contentions, we are not persuaded that his injuries were the direct result of enemy action or friendly fire as required for award of the PH. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03043
When he returned from deployment, he received additional X-rays and an MRI for his right leg and left shoulder. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant has twice applied to the United States Air Forces Central...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03510
His medical records reveal that on 13 February 1968, he was treated for abrasions to both feet and knees. We note that the evidence of record shows that the applicant received medical treatment for abrasions to his feet and knees. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2004- 03510 in Executive Session on 24 February 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Michael J.
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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025566
However, contemporaneous medical evidence shows he had right knee problems (torn cartilage, right knee and recurrent dislocation, patella, right knee) prior to serving in Vietnam, and medical records from Camp Zama, Japan, show his right knee condition as EPTS. There is no evidence of record and the applicant did not provide any evidence that shows he was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action in Vietnam. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to support award of the Purple...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03569
The applicant had completed a total of 4 years, 1 month and 14 days of active service and was serving in the grade of sergeant (E-4) at the time of separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, issued in conjunction with his 29 August...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00832
The FPEB and VA each coded the individual knees at 10% using the criteria for arthritis (5003), with the VA indicating a traumatic onset by using code 5010. Left Knee : With regards to the left knee, the Board considered that the preponderance of the record supported the 10% rating for the left knee for limited motion. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination, as follows: