RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-01937
		INDEX CODE:  107.00
		COUNSEL:  NOT INDICATED

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Purple Heart (PH) medal.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He should have been awarded the PH for an eye injury he received during a mission over Germany.

In support of his request, applicant submits a copy of his Department of Veterans Affairs Rating Decision, dated 27 Feb 08, a copy of DD Form 256, Honorable Discharge, and a statement from a former crew member.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Army Air Corps on 23 Feb 43, and served as a Flight Maintenance Gunner.  He was released from active duty on 31 Oct 45.

His record reflects award of the Air Medal (AM) w/2 Oak Leaf Clusters (OLCs), the European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal, and the Aerial Gunner Badge.  He served in the Ardennes and Rhineland and the Central Europe Campaigns.

On 31 Oct 02, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council denied his request for award of the Distinguished Flying Cross, and instead approved award of an AM.  On 15 Nov 02, his records were administratively corrected to reflect award of the AM and his separation date on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, was corrected to reflect a separation date of 31 Oct 45.

On 6 Dec 04 his records were administratively corrected to reflect award of the AM w/3 OLCs, and that his net active service was 2 years, 8 months and 9 days, rather than 9 years, 8 months, and 9 days and that he served 8 months and 10 days, rather than 3 months, and 10 days of foreign service.

In accordance with Army regulations (AR) 600-45, Decorations, dated 22 Sep 43, during the period in question, the PH was awarded for wounds received in action against an enemy of the United States, or as a direct result of an act of such enemy, provided such wound necessitated treatment by a medical officer.  For the purpose of awarding the PH, a wound was defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force, element, or while in action in the face of the enemy.  When a person eligible for award of the PH was treated for a wound, the commanding officer of the hospital, or the medical officer who treated the wound, furnished the commanding officer of the wounded person a certificate briefly describing the nature of the wound, and certifying the necessity of treatment.  In addition, a wounded soldier’s unsupported statement could be accepted in unusual or extenuating circumstances when, in the opinion of the officer making the award, no corroborative evidence was obtainable.  However, the statement would be substantiated if possible.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial and states, in part, that without verification of the applicant’s injury being caused by direct enemy action, they recommend disapproval for award of the PH.

His previously submitted eyewitness statement does not state he was injured due to direct enemy action.  Official documentation located in his records states he reported defective vision since an airplane accident in Feb 45.  Further, his Report of Physical Examination and Induction, states on question 5: Physical or mental defects of disease: left eye, slight vision lost.

On 19 Aug 05, his request for the PH, which was submitted through his Congressman’s office, was denied by the PHRB.

The DPSIDR evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A former crew member provides a statement indicating the applicant received an injury to his left eye when a small piece of flak hit and exploded one of the pistol shells stored in the turret.  The applicant was taken to the hospital after they landed, where he was treated and cleared to fly the next mission.  He can think of no other way that the pistol shell could have 

exploded, except that it was hit by anti-aircraft fire.  He believes the applicant earned a PH on that mission.

The former crewmember’s letter 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, evidence has not been presented which would lead us to believe that his injuries were the direct result of enemy action.  In this regard, the Board notes the applicant’s WD AGO Form 38, Report of Physical Examination of Enlisted Personnel Prior to Discharge, Release from Active Duty or Retirement, dated 30 Oct 45, reflects that he was injured during an aircraft accident in Feb 45 and was not hospitalized.  While the Board recognizes the statements of another crew member provided by the applicant, and his assumption that the applicant may have been injured when flak hit and exploded a shell stored in the turret, we are not persuaded by the evidence of record that denial of the Purple Heart Medal constitutes an error or injustice.  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 a 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 no considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2008-01937 in Executive Session on 6 Nov 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
			XXXXXXXXXX, Member
			XXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2008-01937 was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 18 May 08, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 29 Jul 08.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Aug 08.
	Exhibit.E.	Letter, XXXXXXXXXX, dated 14 Sep 08.

	XXXXXXXXXX
	Panel Chair