RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02093
		INDEX NUMBER:  107.00
	XXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXX-XX-XXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Purple Heart for injuries received during World War II.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While reviewing his records with the awards and decorations office at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, he was advised that he was eligible for award of the Purple Heart.

The combat accident in which he was injured would not have happened if it were not for the presence of Japanese enemy aircraft in the vicinity of the airport, necessitating the use of alternative lighting instead of regular runway lighting.  His accident was, therefore, a direct result of enemy activity and his back injury the equivalent of an enemy forced bailout.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 20 April 1970, while serving in the grade of colonel, the applicant was hospitalized for the purpose of an executive physical examination and retirement physical examination.  Due to his recurrent back difficulties, medical personnel determined that the applicant should not be considered fit for worldwide duty and should be presented to a medical evaluation board (MEB).  An MEB convened on 24 Apr 70 and diagnosed the applicant with back pain and facial paralysis and referred him to a physical evaluation board (PEB).  On 20 May 70, a PEB was convened and diagnosed the applicant with degenerative disc disease, lumbosacral spine with recurrent incapacitating episodes and paralysis of the left facial nerve.  In their narrative summary, the PEB indicates that the applicant was a pilot in a B-25H assigned to a single-ship low level attack-interdiction combat mission against the enemy.  During the attempted take-off, a gear folded and the aircraft crashed, skewing about 180 degrees off to the side of the runway.  During the skewing of the aircraft, the applicant was struck several strong blows by the control wheel, which was oscillating full-travel fore and aft rapidly, knocking the applicant back hard against the seat.  After the crash, the applicant pulled himself through the top hatch and jumped to the ground.  The next morning, he had low back pain, which became progressively worse through the next few weeks.  The applicant continued to suffer from intermittent back pain throughout his career.  The PEB recommended that the applicant be found unfit because of physical disability and that the disability was the direct result of armed conflict or was caused by an instrumentality of war and incurred in line of duty during a period of war.  They further recommended that the applicant be permanently retired with a compensable rating of 30 percent.  On 26 May 70, the applicant concurred with the recommended findings.  The Secretary of the Air Force approved the PEB’s recommendations and the applicant was retired effective 1 Sep 70.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  The applicant was informed in Jan and May 03 that he was not eligible for award of the Purple Heart Medal, since his back injury was caused by an aircraft accident.  The applicant contends that the accident was a direct result of enemy action because he attempted a nighttime takeoff on a rough, dirt runway with only hand-held candles for runway lights instead of generator-run lights.  The generator-run lights were not used because of enemy aircraft in the area.  The applicant himself refers to the incident in which he injured his back as an accident.  Since the aircraft crashed on takeoff and no enemy aircraft were involved, the accident was not the result of enemy action, but a culmination of adverse conditions.

The complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In his response to the Air Force evaluation, the applicant states that AFPC/DPPPR shows a total lack of understanding of the circumstances and events surrounding the primitive airfield, the crash, and his resultant injury.  The applicant provides additional information to supplement the omissions and facts unknown, not understood, or not sought after by AFPC/DPPPR, to include the date of the accident and other expanded details.  The applicant further discusses AFPC/DPPPR’s determination that since his crash was an accident it ruled out enemy causation.  He reiterates the circumstances that led to the crash and stresses that it was certainly caused by the enemy.

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 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 Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the primary basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  While there is no dispute that the applicant’s heroic service led to his injury, the specific circumstances of his injury do not meet the criteria for award of the Purple Heart.  In our view, to ignore the clear, established standard for award of the Purple Heart would serve to undermine the medal’s significance.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Docket Number BC-2003-02093 in Executive Session on 8 October 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 May 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 21 Jul 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Jul 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 5 Aug 03, w/atchs.