Docket No: 2675-19 Ref: Signature Date Dear This is in reference to your application of 20 February 2019 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. A three-member panel of the Board (Board), sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 2019. 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, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In addition, the Board considered previously provided 16 September 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a Navy mental health professional and your rebuttal. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to its 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 are currently an active duty EOD Senior Chief serving in the Navy. On 19 December 2006, you were assigned to duty part of EOD team that was called to inspect a cache of ammunition found near You were examining a found munition and a brown oily liquid spilled on your left forearm. Based on your training and experience, you believe the liquid was mustard gas or some other chemical agent. You cleaned the oily liquid from your arm by flushing it with IV fluid. In your communications to the Board, you state that once you returned to you received treatment for the wound on your arm. You note that you had redness that lasted 2.5 to 3 weeks, and formed a 6” x 3” wound that eventually scarred. On 2 June 2007, during your Post Deployment Heath Assessment, you reported being exposed to chemical munitions (mustard gas). Your post-deployment medical records document a scar on your forearm due to Sulphur mustard exposure and exposure to chemical warfare. In your petition to the Board, your request a Purple Heart for the injury you received from the chemical agent that spilled on your forearm while you were inspecting found enemy munitions in a forward deployed location. The Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) previously considered your entitlement to a Purple Heart and found that your exposure and resultant injury did not meet the Purple Heart requirement. CNO’s disapproved was communicated to you in a 12 October 2016 letter. As part of the review process, Navy Department Board of Decorations and Medals reviewed your request, and issued an AO dated 16 September 2019. The AO concluded that there is your injury did not occur while you were engaged in actual combat, that you self-treated the exposure to the agent, and that you did not claim to have sought treatment from any medical provider in Iraq. The AO found that the severity of your injury did not meet the Purple Heart threshold of necessitating treatment by a medical officer. The AO was provided to you, and you were given 30 days in which to submit a response. You provided a rebuttal to the AO which included a personal statement dated 17 October 2019, from the Platoon Leader for the EOD escort mission and a personal statement from you, dated 1 November 2019. The Platoon Leader’s statement corroborates your version of events in that you were exposed to some kind of munitions “boobie trap” that was left for American forces and that you suffered a burn to your forearm from exposure to a substance that fell out of artillery shell that you were checked. In your personal statement you note that after you were exposed, you immediately ran to a medic and asked for IV fluid to wash off the agent. You state there was no time to see a medical doctor but upon your return to you reported to Medical Combat Action Support Hospital and were treated by an Army Medical Doctor. You take issue with the AO’s statement that you did not claim to seek treatment. The Board carefully reviewed your application, and took into consideration the AO, your statement and the statement of your Platoon Leader. The Board also reviewed your post-deployment medical records which document the scar on your forearm. The Board concluded that you were exposed to some sort of chemical agent on 19 December 2006, but that the resultant injury did not meet the Purple Heart threshold. The Board noted that you were able to care for your wound by flushing it with IV fluid, and that you were able to continue your duties without receiving treatment from a medical officer. Even in consideration of your statement that you reported to Medical Combat Action Support Hospital after your return to FOB Brassfiend Mora, the Board concurred with both the CNO’s denial of entitlement to the Purple Heart and with the AO’s recommendation. 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 the 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.