RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01734 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical conditions, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Herpes Simplex Virus, be reevaluated as combat-related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should receive CRSC for the injuries he incurred from being sexually assaulted and forcibly held against his will by foreign soldiers during his deployment to Iraq. He has also suffers from mental issues as a result of being sexually assaulted. It is only fair and equitable that his medical conditions be related to his service in Iraq. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 20 Nov 03, the applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Air National Guard (ANG). On 28 Jul 13, he was relieved from active duty and placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) effective 29 Jul 13. The applicant submitted an application for CRSC for PTSD and herpes. His claim was disapproved on 22 Nov 13 based on there was no evidence to substantiate his disabilities were combat- related. He submitted a request for reconsideration and on 22 Jan 14 his reconsideration request was denied due to no evidence to show his disabilities were incurred as a result of a combat-related event. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFDC recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The CRSC program was established to provide compensation to certain retirees with combat-related disabilities that qualify under the established criteria. If the former service member fails to satisfy the preliminary CRSC criteria, no further consideration by their service department is required and the claim will be denied. If the service member satisfies the preliminary CRSC criteria, the request is reviewed for combat related determination. The DVA awards serviced-connected disabilities based on their standards. The DVA resolves doubt in the interest of the veteran and grants service connection for injuries or diseases incurred while in the service. While service connection is required for initial eligibility for CRSC consideration, CRSC guidance requires objective documentary information in order to support a combat related determination. Each service will determine whether a disability is combat related using the definitions and criteria set forth in DD Form 2860, Claim for Combat-related Special Compensation (CRSC). The applicant believes his disabilities meet the combat-related criteria of armed conflict. The criteria for armed conflict includes incidents involving a member while interned as a prisoner of war (POW), detained against their will in custody of hostile or belligerent force or while escaping or attempting to escape from such confinement. The applicant believes he should receive CRSC for his injuries he incurred at the hands of the Iraqi soldiers and that it is only fair and equitable that his conditions be related to his service in Iraq. While the applicant has received service connection for his disabilities by the Department of Veterans Affairs, this is not sufficient for a combat-related determination. Per the guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, determinations of whether a disability is combat- related will be based on the preponderance of available documentary information. The information is weighed in relation to known facts and circumstances, and determinations will be made on the basis of credible, objective documentary information in the records as distinguished from personal opinion, speculations, or conjecture. In addition, the fact that a service member incurred disability in an area of armed conflict or while participating in combat operations is not sufficient by itself to support a combat-related determination. There must be a definite, documented, causal relationship between the armed conflict and the resulting disability. The applicant was not being held as a POW, or in custody of a hostile or belligerent force, or trying to escape from confinement, POW, or detained status. The American military, as well as other coalition/allied forces, provides military troops, equipment and munitions to Iraqi forces, as part of an agreement with Iraq. As such, Iraqi troops, barring a verified terrorist action, are not considered hostile/belligerent forces. American military troops and contractors, military troops from other coalition/allied nations, and Iraqi troops are considered “friendly” forces. We have had instances where United States (US) Air Force personnel have been raped by members from other branches of the US military services, as well as by civilians off base. While it is undeniable that these actions are devastating and criminal, they do not meet the criteria for approval for CRSC. Instances of rape are not unique to the military, combat, or deployed locations. For rape to be approved for CRSC it must be confirmed that the victim was a POW, or that the rape was part of a terrorist action. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFDC evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 4 Aug 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. On 9 Sep 11, the applicant underwent a worldwide duty evaluation due to a history of PTSD and depression. His PTSD was attributed to a sexual assault during a deployment to Iraq in 2010. It was determined he was not worldwide qualified. In May 13, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) found the applicant unfit for military service with a combined disability rating of 70 percent for PTSD and major depression incurred in a combat zone but not combat-related. On 28 Mar 14, the applicant underwent a TDRL reevaluation and it was noted he was symptomatic from PTSD and depression. Upon reviewing the documentation provided by the applicant and his service treatment record, there is no evidence that the applicant’s traumatic experience fits the definition of “combat- related.” His diagnoses of PTSD and major depression are not in question and he is receiving compensation for the PTSD and depression. A complete copy of the AFBCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 6 Jul 15, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). 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 timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we do not find the applicant’s service-connected medical conditions were the direct result of an armed conflict, while engaged in hazardous service, in the performance of duty under conditions simulating war, or through an instrumentality of war. As such, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and the AFBCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant’s condition does not meet the mandatory criteria for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation program. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-01734 in Executive Session on 12 Jul 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-01734 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Apr 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPFDC, dated 12 May 14, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Aug 14. Exhibit E. Memorandum, AFBCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant, dated 23 Jun 15. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Jul 15.