RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-03865
		INDEX CODE:  107.00

		COUNSEL:  XXXXX

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Purple Heart Medal (PHM) for being under enemy fire while serving upcountry (Vietnam) in combat.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was assigned to the 56th Special Operations Wing (SOW), Detachment 1, from January 1971 to July 1973.  He worked upcountry in Laos and Cambodia in secret for a division of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) called JXXXXXX.  He states he came under unfriendly fire many times.  During April 1972, while working in Laos, he was wounded in his right hand by shrapnel during a mortar attack.  He was not aware he could change his records to reflect his injury and award of the PHM as his activities while upcountry were classified and he was told by the Air Force and the CIA to keep quiet about it.  

In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a personal statement and copies of letters of support from his peers, and a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and a copy of his honorable discharge certificate. 

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

He enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 June 1969 and was progressively promoted to the grade of Sergeant with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 June 1971.  He served a total of four years and nine days and was honorably discharged on 5 July 1973.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial.  DPPPR states to be awarded the PHM a member must provide documentation to support he was wounded as a direct result of enemy action.  Indirect injuries do not meet PHM criteria.  Further, it is necessary that the wound required or received treatment by medical personnel.  DPPPR states after researching his military record and his application, they could find no support for award of the PHM.  The three individuals who provided statements of support do not have first-hand knowledge of him receiving wounds as a direct result of enemy action.

DPPPR’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 14 January 2005 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Applicant has failed to provide documentation to support he was wounded as a direct result of enemy action and that the wound required and/or received medical treatment by medical personnel.  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-2004-03865 in Executive Session on 14 June 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 May 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 7 Jan 05.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Jan 05.