Dear  
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.      
 
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2020.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application and personal statements, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your service records, applicable statutes, regulations and policies, and an advisory opinion (AO) provided by the Navy Department Board of Decorations and Medals (NDBDM).  
 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record.  
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 9 April 1969, and on 9 October 1970 you were discharged from active duty with an honorable characterization of service and transferred to the Marine Corps Reserve.  According to your combat history, between 17 October 1969 and 28 September 1970 you participated in three combat operations in .  On or about 14 January 1970 you contend that were wounded in action against hostile forces.  You stated that your injuries were examined and treated by a Corpsman in the field.  You further stated that at the time of your injury your platoon was low on men, you were the only machine gunner in your platoon, and that the Corpsman felt he could treat you in the field. 
 
Within the Department of the Navy, to qualify for the Purple Heart Medal (PH), the wound received has to be the direct or indirect result of enemy action, and such wound also has to have required treatment by a medical officer at the time of injury.  Both criteria must be met to be awarded the PH.   
 
On 9 October 2019, Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) denied your entitlement to the PH.  HQMC specifically noted: 
 
A further review of your records revealed that this Headquarters denied your entitlement to the Purple Heart Medal on March 18, 1971; February 23, 1972; May 15, 1974 and June 23, 1994.  The National Personnel Records Center denied your entitlement to the Purple Heart Medal on June 24, 1997 and August 21, 1999.  Navy Personnel Command denied your entitlement to the Purple Heart Medal on March 2, 2006.  A thorough review of all available records failed to substantiate your entitlement to the Purple Heart Medal. 
 
As part of the review process, the NDBDM provided an AO dated 10 August 2020.  The AO expressly stated that you are not entitled to the PH: 
 
After thorough review of the available evidence and the pertinent regulations, standards, and past practices within the Department of the Navy, we determined the Petitioner did not meet the criteria for the PH, and therefore is not entitled to that Medal.  We found no evidence of material error or injustice and recommend the petition be denied.  
 
The AO noted that the essence of your case is that there is no evidence you were ever wounded in action with the enemy to a severity necessitating treatment by a military physician.  The AO observed that you failed to respond to repeated requests by the Department of the Navy that you provide eyewitness statements to substantiate your claim, and that your own statement confirms the alleged injuries were treated by a corpsman and you returned to duty.  The AO concluded in part that regardless of the cause of your injuries, by your own admission your injuries did not meet the severity threshold.   
 
The Board, in its review of the entire record and petition, carefully considered your contentions as specifically outlined in your petition.  However, the Board unanimously determined, even after reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to you, that you do not meet the qualifying criteria to receive the PH.  The Board concluded that there was no evidence in the record that you were injured under conditions for which the PH can be authorized, namely, that you received a wound resulting from enemy action, and that the wound necessitated treatment (not merely an examination) by a medical officer at the time of injury.  Accordingly, the Board concurred with the AO and concluded that you did not meet the baseline eligibility criteria for the PH.   
 
The BCNR sincerely appreciates, respects, and commends you for your honorable and faithful service during  and your entire military career.  Unfortunately, it is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken.  You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board.  In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.  Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.   


Sincerely,