DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Dear This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code. After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 2021. 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 the advisory opinion contained in Director CORB letter 5819 CORB: 001 of 16 March 2021; a copy of which was previously provided to you for comment. A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in July 2008. Medical records document that you suffered a laceration to your head in May 2013 and reported head pain in October 2013. During the October 2013 medical evaluation, you reported being hit in the head with a tent pole as the cause of your pain. In January 2014, you were seen by medical for symptoms related to Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) including headaches. Finally, you were evaluated by Neurology in February 2016 during which it documents you suffered a head injury in January 2016. In 2019, you were transferred to the Permanent Disability Retirement List. Subsequently, you filed for Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) in which you claimed to have been struck by a metal bar on the chin in November 2014 and struck in the head by a metal stake in January 2016. The CRSC Board denied your claim based on a finding that neither incident qualified for CRSC under conditions simulating war since they were not combat related incidents. The Board carefully considered your arguments that you should qualify for CRSC for TBI and scars on your head and chin since they were incurred during a training exercise simulating war. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. Section 1413a of Title 10, United States Code, provides the statutory authority for payment of CRSC. Based on procedures and criteria prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, it allows for payment of CRSC for combat-related disabilities incurred as a direct result of armed conflict, while engaged in hazardous service, in the performance of duty under conditions simulating war, or through an instrumentality of war. In addition, CRSC may be awarded if a disability is attributable to an injury for which a Purple Heat was awarded. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense issued a Directive Type Memorandum on 27 April 2004 that provided guidance on CRSC. Additionally, Department of Defense Regulation 7000.14-R (Financial Management Regulation) also addresses CRSC by stating “determinations of whether a disability is combat-related for CRSC will be based on the preponderance of available documentary information where quality of information is more important than quantity. All relevant documentary information is to be 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, speculation, or conjecture.” In your case, the Board concurred with the advisory opinion in your case that the preponderance of the evidence does not support payment of CRSC for your claimed conditions. The Board agreed with the rationale in the opinion that a disability condition incurred during participation in simulated combat operations does not support payment of CRSC. There must be evidence the disability condition was incurred during a simulated combat related event. The CRSC guidance makes it clear that payment under conditions simulating war only covers disability conditions incurred during the performance of military training events that are simulating war. Examples provided include hand-to-hand combat, grenade and live fire exercises, bayonet training, obstacle course, and repelling. All are examples of training that are simulating events that a service member would experience if actually engaged with an enemy combatant during armed conflict. The Board was unable to find evidence in your record or application that documents that your injuries occurred under these circumstances. In fact, the evidence indicates that your head and chin injuries likely resulted from performing routine military duties as part of military training exercises. Since the CRSC guidance makes it clear that disability conditions incurred while only participating in combat operations is insufficient to merit payment of CRSC. The Board determined that your injuries incurred while only participating in simulated combat operations is also insufficient for payment of CRSC. In the Board’s opinion, there must be evidence that your injuries were incurred while you were in a simulated combat engagement with the enemy since CRSC is for combat-related disabilities. Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. 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, 8/30/2021 Deputy Director