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.