Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02611
Original file (BC 2013 02611.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-02611
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED: NO

	 

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Purple Heart (PH) Medal.

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was wounded in action against the enemy while stationed in 
Korea.  He received shrapnel to the right side of his face and 
legs.  In the 1950’s, minorities were treated differently 
compared to other military personnel.  He never thought about 
receiving the PH until he had a conversation with another 
veteran.  

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of a 
letter from AFPC/DPMASA and a copy of his DD Form 214, Report of 
Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States.

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant received an honorable discharge on 20 Oct 56.

On 4 Nov 77, AFPC/DPMASA sent the applicant a letter notifying 
him that the Purple Heart Review Board (PHRB) denied his request 
for award of the PH.  

In accordance with AFM 900-3, during the period in question, the 
Purple Heart (PH) was awarded for wounds received in action 
against an enemy, or as a direct result of an act of any enemy, 
opposing armed force, or hostile foreign force.  For the purpose 
of considering award of the PH, a wound was defined as an injury 
to any part of the body from an outside force or agent.  A 
physical lesion was not required, provided the concussion or 
other form of injury received was due to direct enemy, opposing 
armed force, or hostile foreign force action.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________
_

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

1. AFPC/DPSID recommends denial stating that after reviewing the 
applicant’s official military personnel record, they were unable 
to verify award of the PH.  Additionally, they were unable to 
locate a signed certificate, special order or any other official 
documentation that verifies the PH was awarded to the applicant.  
Although the applicant contends he received shrapnel to side of 
his face and nearly lost his right eye, there is no medical 
documentation to support this injury.  

2. The applicant has not provided any of the required 
documentation such as a detailed personal account of how the 
injury occurred, medical documentation substantiating that he 
received an injury which required medical treatment at the time 
the injury occurred, and eyewitness statements from individuals 
who saw him receive the injury.  The PHRB previously denied the 
applicant’s request due to lack of proof of an injury which 
meets the basic criteria for the PH Medal.  

The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He provides a letter from a nurse practioner from the Department 
of Veterans Affairs (DVA) that states both scars are more likely 
than not to have been related to an injury that the applicant 
sustained and if the injuries were inflicted by shrapnel then it 
is more likely than not that such wounds required treatment.  
The nurse practitioner was able to confirm an injury near the 
right upper lip.  He also provides an excerpt from his medical 
records that is not entirely legible; however, it appears that 
it says his face was abided by flying empty cartridges and he 
has a 2 x 05 inch abrasion on his upper right lip.  The rest of 
the document is very difficult to read.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
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 injustice.  After a 
thorough review of the available evidence and applicant’s 
complete submission, we find no evidence that his records should 
be corrected to show he was awarded the PH.  In this respect, 
the applicant’s contentions are noted; however, without 
supporting documentation to prove he sustained injuries as a 
result of direct enemy action, we are unable to provide a 
favorable determination.  As such, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 
and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  The 
applicant’s honorable service is noted.  Regrettably, we do not 
find the evidence submitted is sufficient to recommend granting 
the requested relief.

________________________________________________________________
_

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-2013-02611 in Executive Session on 28 Jan 14, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member






The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2013-02611 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 12 Nov 13.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Dec 13.
    




                                   
                                   Panel Chair








FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974


FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
4


4




This document contains information which must be protected IAW AFI 33-332 and DoD Regulation 
5400.11; Privacy Act of 1974 as Amended Applies, and it is For Official Use Only (FOUO).

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01822

    Original file (BC 2013 01822.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01822 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Purple Heart (PH) Medal. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He realizes that he was not injured from enemy...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-05131

    Original file (BC-2011-05131.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time of his discharge, he was furnished a WD AGO Form 53-96, Military Record and Report of Separation Certification of Service, stating he received no wounds in action. DPSID was unable to locate any official medical documentation within the applicant’s official Military Personnel Records or medical records substantiating the applicant received and/or was treated for a shrapnel wound while serving in WWII, nor has the applicant provided any such documentation to support his claim. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05179

    Original file (BC 2013 05179.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05179 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Purple Heart (PH) Medal. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04401

    Original file (BC 2013 04401.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His current medical provider requests that his medical records includes a history of receiving shrapnel wounds and that he exhibits scars consistent with shrapnel wounds and further requests that his statement be included as a part of his official medical records. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial, stating, in part, that there is no special order, recommendation or signed certificate in the applicant's...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00130

    Original file (BC 2014 00130.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received shrapnel wounds in his arms and legs during a rescue mission on 3 Apr 72 at Cam Lo, Vietnam. The “AFGCM w/4BOLC” to read “Air Force Good Conduct Medal with one Silver Oak Leaf Cluster (AFGCM w/1SOLC).” The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00097

    Original file (BC 2014 00097.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda 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. A review of the member’s official military records and the documentation submitted by the applicant did not reveal any evidence that the applicant qualified for award of the PH. THE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02379

    Original file (BC 2013 02379.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. While the applicant has presented recent medical documentation indicating a shrapnel injury to his knee, he has presented no evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00035

    Original file (BC-2013-00035.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board should consider his request and award him the PH because he heard of a few guys who received the PH and did not have an injury. The applicant's request cannot be considered by the PH Review Board unless there is a detailed personal account of how the injury occurred, medical documentation substantiating treatment was received, and eyewitness statements. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 03097

    Original file (BC 2012 03097.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Although the applicant provided medical documentation, it was provided eight months after the injury occurred. We took notice of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 02244 3

    Original file (BC 2007 02244 3.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 Aug 10, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request, determining the evidence presented by the applicant was not sufficient to conclude he incurred an injury as a direct result of enemy action. He believes the Board denied his request because it may have used another veteran’s records in determining his case (Exhibit E). Each request is considered based on the policies and criteria in use at the time the service member was injured, and the determination is dependent on...