Docket No. 4967-18 
Ref: Signature Date 


This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found 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 for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 December 2018.  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.   

A review of your record shows you entered active duty with the Navy in June 2006.  After deploying to Iraq in 2008, you were diagnosed with major depressive disorder and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) resulting in your referral to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).  In March 2011, the PEB found you unfit for your depressive disorder with PTSD as a related diagnosis.  Based on the PEB findings, you were placed on the Temporary Disability Retirement List in April 2011 and eventually transferred to the Permanent Disability Retirement List. In April 2012, the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Board denied your request for CRSC based on lack of evidence your disability conditions were the result of a specific combat-related event.  You were again denied CRSC in January 2017 by the CRSC Board based on the same rationale. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve CRSC for your mental health conditions.  You assert that your mental health conditions were caused by traumatic events witnessed in a combat zone and should qualify you for CRSC.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  In order to qualify for CRSC, a servicemember must incur a disability condition as a result of one of the statutory conditions which qualify for CRSC.  In your case, you argue that you qualify for CRSC as a direct result of armed conflict based on your service in  during which you witnessed traumatic events that led to your mental health conditions.  Department of Defense guidance for CRSC as a direct result of armed conflict requires that a member incur a disability “while engaged with a hostile or belligerent nation, faction, force, or terrorist.”  This has been interpreted to mean a member must be directly engaged with the enemy and incur a disability condition as a result of the engagement.  The guidance makes it clear that incurring a disability condition during a period of war or in an area of armed conflict or while participating in combat operations is insufficient to support CRSC.  In your case, the Board was unable to find evidence that your mental health conditions were incurred while you were engaged with the enemy.  Your medical board report documents that your mental health conditions were the result of you witnessing multiple traumatic events while assigned in support of combat operations in with no mention that you were directly engaged with the enemy.  The Board concluded this was insufficient to support CRSC since the act of serving in an area of armed conflict or participating in combat operation, without engaging the enemy, is insufficient to qualify for CRSC under the existing guidance.  Accordingly, the Board determined insufficient evidence of error or injustice exists to warrant a change to your record. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence.  New evidence is evidence not previously 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, 

2