IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 August 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20230001093 APPLICANT REQUESTS: in effect, reversal of the Soldier Program and Services Decision, at the U.S. Army Human Resources Command that denied him Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) for his service-connected disabilities and injuries. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149, Application for Correction of Military Record, with his statement * DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty * Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Benefit Details * VA Rating Decision * Memorandum, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (AHRC), Soldier Programs and Services Division * VA Summary of Benefits Letter * Disabled Veteran Contact Brief Sheets (3) FACTS: 1. The applicant states, in effect, his service in the Gulf War led to his post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and obstructive sleep apnea associated with hypertension (hypertension vascular disease). He contends that his service-connected medical conditions meet the criteria for award of CRSC. His PTSD symptoms include nightmares, fear of travelling over bridges, fear of being around crowds, inability to sleep, and fear of small spaces. 2. His military records show the applicant served in the Regular Army from 17 July 1978 until he was honorably retired on 31 July 2000. 3. His DD Form 214 shows he completed over 22 years of service as an automated logistics specialist. This form further shows he served in Southwest Asia from 15 October 1990 to 20 April 1991. He did not receive any awards for valor. 4. The applicant’s official military personnel file contains his original claim for CRSC, 5 December 2017. In his claim he stated, in effect, that he was under constant chemical attacks, subjected to roadside bombings, and deprived of sleep. He also experienced waste being burned near his sleep and work areas. His company also gave him medication to take to combat chemical attacks. His claim included his VA service- connected conditions of hypertension, sleep apnea, PTSD, and coronary artery disease. 5. On 2 July 2018, HRC notified the applicant that his VA service-connected disabilities could not be verified as combat-related. There was no documentation in his claim that established a definite causal relationship between a combat-related event and his major depressive disorder to include PTSD. Further, there was no connection between combat and his sleep apnea noted by the VA. His hypertension did not meet the criteria for CRSC unless it was a secondary condition to diabetes mellitus caused by Agent Orange exposure. Hypertension could also be secondary to another combat-related condition or could be linked as the primary condition to ischemic heart disease which is one of the recently granted Agent Orange presumptive conditions. 6. He requested reconsideration on 4 September 2019. On 16 October 2019, HRC denied his request citing the same reason as stated above. Further, award of CRSC required the disability or injury be linked to a combat-related event. There were no medical supporting documents in the applicant’s claim to confirm his conditions were directly caused by a specific combat-related event. 7. He requested reconsideration on 8 March 2021. On 6 April 2021 HRC notified the applicant that his claim was denied. This notification states that the decision was final. The reason cited was that the documentation submitted made no mention of a combat- related event in relationship to his disabilities. CRSC was denied for the following disabilities: * major depressive disorder to include PTSD * coronary artery disease with stable angina * obstructive sleep apnea * residuals, right ankle injury, diagnosed as tendonitis * retropatellar pain syndrome, right knee * retropatellar pain syndrome with chondromalacia, left knee * hypertension (hypertension vascular disease) 8. The applicant provides his VA Rating Decision, 28 August 2017, which shows he is receiving compensation for the service-connected disabilities listed above. 9. The applicant’s available record is void, and the applicant did not provide evidence showing his illness/injuries were combat-related. 10. Title 26, U.S. Code, section 104 states that the term "combat-related injury" means personal injury or sickness which is incurred as a direct result of armed conflict, while engaged in extra hazardous service, or under conditions simulating war, or which is caused by an instrumentality of war. 11. Regulatory guidance states a determination that a disability was caused by an instrumentality of war and incurred in the line of duty will be appropriate only when it is also determined that the disability so incurred renders the member physically unfit and was incurred during one of the periods of war as defined by law. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicant's record of service, documents submitted in support of the petition and executed a comprehensive and standard review based on law, policy and regulation. Upon review of the applicant’s petition, available military records, Human Resources Command (HRC) CRSC branch advisory, the Board concurred with the advising official finding no documentation in his claim that established a definite causal relationship between a combat-related event and his major depressive disorder to include PTSD. Additionally, the Board noted, there was no connection between combat and his sleep apnea noted by the VA. The Board agreed the applicant’s hypertension did not meet the criteria for CRSC unless it was a secondary condition to diabetes mellitus caused by Agent Orange exposure. 2. Furthermore, the Board determined there was no evidence that any one of his disabilities was the direct result of armed combat; was related to the use of combat devices (instrumentalities of war); the result of combat training; incurred while performing extra hazardous service though not engaged in combat; incurred while performing activities or training in preparation for armed conflict in conditions simulating war. The Board agreed that a reversal on the previous non-combat related determinations for his Soldier Program and Services Decision, at the U.S. Army Human Resources Command that denied him Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) for his service-connected disabilities and injuries is not warranted. Therefore, relief was denied. ? BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : 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 the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 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. REFERENCES: 1. Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation, Volume 7B: a. Section 630301 states a member may not be paid CRSC unless he or she has applied for and elected to receive compensation under the CRSC program by filing an application on DD Form 2860 (Claim for CRSC), with the Military Department from which he or she retired. A member may submit an application for CRSC at any time and, if otherwise qualified for CRSC, compensation will be paid for any month after May 2003 for which all conditions of eligibility were met. b. Section 630502 states a combat-related disability is a disability with an assigned medical diagnosis code from the VA Schedule Rating of Disabilities (VASRD). The Military Departments will determine whether a disability is combat-related based on the following criteria: * 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 c. The Department will record for each disability determined to be combat-related which of the circumstances provided qualifies the disability as combat-related. A determination of combat-relatedness (see section 6306) will be made with respect to each separate disability with an assigned medical diagnosis code from the VASRD. A retiree may have disabilities that are not combat-related Such disabilities will not be considered in determining eligibility for CRSC or the amount of CRSC payable. An uncorroborated statement in a record that a disability is combat-related will not, by itself, be considered determinative for purposes of meeting the combat-related standards for CRSC prescribed herein. CRSC determinations must be made on the basis of the program criteria. d. Section 6306 (Determinations of Combat Relatedness) (1) Direct Result of Armed Conflict: a. The disability is a disease or injury incurred in the line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict. To support a combat-related determination, it is not sufficient to only state the fact that a member incurred the disability during a period of war, in an area of armed conflict, or while participating in combat operations. There must be a definite causal relationship between the armed conflict and the resulting disability. b. Armed conflict includes a war, expedition, occupation of an area or territory, battle, skirmish, raid, invasion, rebellion, insurrection, guerilla action, riot, or any other action in which Service members are engaged with a hostile or belligerent nation, faction, force, or with terrorists. c. Armed conflict may also include such situations as incidents involving a member while interned as a prisoner of war or while detained against his or her will in custody of a hostile or belligerent force, or while escaping or attempting to escape from such confinement, prisoner of war, or detained status. (2) While Engaged in Hazardous Service. Hazardous service is service that includes, but is not limited to, aerial flight, parachute duty, demolition duty, experimental stress duty, and diving duty. A finding that a disability is the result of such hazardous service requires that the injury or disease be the direct result of actions taken in the performance of such service. Travel to and from such service, or actions incidental to a normal duty status not considered hazardous, are not included. (3) In the Performance of Duty Under Conditions Simulating War. In general, performance of duty under conditions simulating war covers disabilities resulting from military training, such as war games, practice alerts, tactical exercises, airborne operations, leadership reaction courses, grenade and live fire weapon practice, bayonet training, hand-to-hand combat training, repelling, and negotiation of combat confidence and obstacle courses. It does not include physical training activities such as calisthenics, jogging, formation running, or supervised sport activities. (4) Instrumentality of War: a. There must be a direct causal relationship between the instrumentality of war and the disability. It is not required that a member’s disability be incurred during an actual period of war. The disability must be incurred incident to a hazard or risk of the service. b. An instrumentality of war is a vehicle, vessel, or device designed primarily for Military Service and intended for use in such Service at the time of the occurrence or injury. It may also include such instrumentality not designed primarily for Military Service if use of or occurrence involving such instrumentality subjects the individual to a hazard peculiar to Military Service. Such use or occurrence differs from the use or occurrence under similar circumstances in civilian pursuits. c. A determination that a disability is the result of an instrumentality of war may be made if the disability was incurred in any period of service as a result of such diverse causes as wounds caused by a military weapon, accidents involving a military combat vehicle, injury or sickness caused by fumes, gases, or explosion of military ordnance, vehicles, or materiel. d. For example, if a member is on a field exercise, and is engaged in a sporting activity and falls and strikes an armored vehicle, then the injury will not be considered to result from the instrumentality of war (armored vehicle) because it was the sporting activity that was the cause of the injury, not the vehicle. On the other hand, if the individual was engaged in the same sporting activity and the armored vehicle struck the member, then the injury would be considered the result of an instrumentality of war. 2. Section 1556 of Title 10, United States Code, requires the Secretary of the Army to ensure that an applicant seeking corrective action by the Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) be provided with a copy of any correspondence and communications (including summaries of verbal communications) to or from the Agency with anyone outside the Agency that directly pertains to or has material effect on the applicant's case, except as authorized by statute. ARBA medical advisory opinions and reviews are authored by ARBA civilian and military medical and behavioral health professionals and are therefore internal agency work product. Accordingly, ARBA does not routinely provide copies of ARBA Medical Office recommendations, opinions (including advisory opinions), and reviews to Army Board for Correction of Military Records applicants (and/or their counsel) prior to adjudication. 3. AR 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR will decide cases on the evidence of record. It is not an investigative body. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20230001093 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1