IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 January 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080015448 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that he be awarded the Purple Heart. 2. The applicant states that the hospital said his unit would award the Purple Heart to him, and his unit said the hospital would award the Purple Heart to him. 3. The applicant provides excerpts from his military medical records. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant's military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 July 1968 and was awarded the military occupational specialty of personnel specialist. 3. The applicant arrived in Vietnam on 19 December 1969 and was assigned duties as a plumber in an engineer battalion. 4. On 28 April 1970, the applicant was treated for abdominal pain and a bruise to his right flank. It was stated that the applicant came in complaining of these conditions following a mortar round going off near him. The applicant was given x-rays and a urinalysis, he was diagnosed with an upset stomach, he was prescribed Maalox and demoral for pain. He was returned to duty with profile limitations. 5. The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniformed Code of Military Justice on two occasions. He was convicted by a special court-martial for intent to defraud, in that he unlawfully made certain checks for payments while willfully knowing that funds would be insufficient for the amounts of said checks. 6. On 28 July 1970, the applicant was given a general discharge for unsuitability. 7. Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the Purple Heart is awarded for wounds sustained as a result of hostile action. Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was the result of hostile action, the wound must have required treatment by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record. 8. The Vietnam Casualty List does not contain the applicant's name. 9. On 22 April 2008, the Human Resources Command (HRC) Military Awards Board stated that the fact that the applicant was prescribed pain medication is not, in itself, qualifying treatment in regards to award of the Purple Heart. The HRC continues that a prescription for pain does not indicate that the contusion (bruise) was medically treated. The HRC denied the applicant's request for the Purple Heart. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant has submitted documentation to show that he was treated for an upset stomach and that he had a bruise to his left flank following a mortar blast. There is no evidence that either the upset stomach or the bruise was caused by the mortar blast. 2. That being said, an upset stomach is not a wound and would not qualify the applicant for the Purple Heart. While the bruise may have been caused by the applicant falling as a result of the mortar blast, these types of injuries are typical of service in a combat area and are not normally considered sufficient to warrant award of the Purple Heart. This is supported by the fact that the applicant's name is not contained on the Vietnam Casualty List. 3. The longstanding rule requiring Soldiers to seek medical assistance for a battlefield injury exists not only for purposes of corroboration but also has the effect of discriminating among the injuries eligible for the award. While the applicant's bruise was noted by medical personnel, a bruise is not treated as a penetrating wound would be treated. 4. In view of the foregoing, there is insufficient evidence that would warrant awarding the applicant the Purple Heart. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___X____ ___X___ ____X___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _______ _ X_______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080015448 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080015448 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1