DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 1038-21 Ref: Signature Date 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 1 July 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 April 2021 along with your response to the opinion. A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in November 1981. On 6 February 1991, you suffered a dislocation of your left elbow during Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm that later required surgery. After your retirement from the Marine Corps in 2003, the Department of Veterans Affairs assigned you disability ratings for your left wrist, left elbow, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Based on these disability ratings, you filed for Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) on 2 December 2020 for your PTSD and right shoulder condition. The CRSC Board denied your application on 13 January 2021 based on lack of evidence that your conditions qualified for CRSC. The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve CRSC for injuries to your left elbow, left wrist, and left shoulder. In addition, you appear to request reconsideration of the CRSC denial of your PTSD claim. You argue that the left arm and shoulder conditions were incurred during a SCUD drill during Desert Shield/Desert Storm. You also provided a statement on different incidents during Desert Shield/Desert Storm that contributed to your PTSD. 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 (DTM) Memorandum on 27 April 2004 that provided guidance on CRSC. Additionally, Department of Defense Regulation 7000.14-R (Financial Management Regulation) was issued that also addressed CRSC. In reviewing your case, the Board determined the preponderance of the evidence does not support a finding that you met the criteria for payment of CRSC. Specifically, the Board noted that medical evidence does not support your narrative on how your left arm and shoulder injuries occurred. Medical records only document that you dislocated your left elbow upon falling on an outstretched arm and required treatment as a result. The witness letter you provided also does not corroborate your version of events since it only documents that you reported an arm injury in the morning after conducting SCUD drills. The Board felt this was insufficient substantiation that you injured your arm, wrist, and shoulder during the SCUD drills. Absent further corroboration of the origins of your injuries, the Board concluded that you did not meet the burden of proof that your injuries were incurred under conditions simulating war. Regarding your PTSD claim, the Board concurred with the advisory opinion that the incidents you describe are insufficient to meet the criteria for payment of CRSC due to armed conflict. The April 2004 DTM states the “fact a member incurred the disability during a period of war or an area of armed conflict or while participating in combat operations is not sufficient to support a combat-related determination. There must be a definite causal relationship between the armed conflict and the resulting disability.” Further, the policy states the qualifying disability conditions must be incurred while “engaged with a hostile or belligerent nation, faction, force, or terrorists.” In the examples you provided, the Board found no evidence that you were engaged with the enemy to meet the criteria for payment of CRSC. Specifically, the Board determined that SCUD attacks do not qualify as “engaging” with the enemy since they are indirect attacks. As for the other incidents you describe, these also do not describe combat with the enemy but incidents of worry that occurred in an area of combat operations without direct engagement with the enemy. Based on the DTM guidance that states simply incurring a disability condition in a combat area is insufficient to qualify for CRSC, the Board reached the conclusion that developing PTSD as result of these incidents that you described in your application does not meet the criteria for payment of CRSC. 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, 7/2/2021 Deputy Director