RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03701 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1.  She receives Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay (CRDP). 2.  Her post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) be determined combat related, and she receives Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC). 3.  She receives a higher disability rating than 30 percent. 4.  She be allowed to change or cancel her Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her retirement process was insufficient with proper procedures and lack of communication causing her confusion of her retirement benefits and entitlements, resulting in incorrect benefits, entitlements, and retired pay. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 4 Oct 93. On 15 Oct 96, the applicant was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service and was credited with three years, 15 days of active service, and transferred to the Air Force Reserve. On 20 Aug 12, the applicant was entered into the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) process to determine medical fitness for continued worldwide duty and retention. On 2 Jan 13, the AF IMT 618, Medical Board Report, recommended the applicant be referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB). The MEB established the following diagnosis: PTSD, Major Depression Disorder (MDD), lower back pain, knee pain (able to pass annual PT tests). On 20 Jan 13, the applicant signed the AF IMT 618, indicating she had been informed of the findings and recommendations of the MEB, and would not submit a letter of exception. On 12 Nov 13, the IPEB found the applicant unfit resulting from PTSD and MDD, recurrent, moderate; and recommended permanent retirement with 30 percent disability compensation rating in accordance with the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) schedule for Rating Disabilities guidelines. On 28 Dec 13, the applicant was relieved from active duty, and permanently disability retired, effective, 29 Dec 13, being credited with 20 years, 2 months, and 25 days of service. On 27 Feb 14, the applicant received notification from AFPC/DPFDC, that her claim for CRSC was denied because she did not meet the basic eligibility requirement for CRSC of receiving military retirement pay, and have waived a portion or all of that retirement pay to receive disability compensation from the DVA. On 18 Jun 14, the applicant was advised by ARPC/DPTTR, that she had completed the required years of service under the provision of Title 10, U.S.C., Section 12731, and will be entitled to retired pay upon application, normally at age 60. Also, they notified her she was eligible to participate in the RCSBP. On 14 Jul 14, the applicant’s second claim for CRSC was denied. She was advised that to be approvable for CRSC a clear and direct relationship to specific "combat" stressors (such as exposure to hostile fire, or surviving an aircraft crash) must be reflected in medical or DVA documentation. Her claim lacked any evidence for consideration under current CRSC criteria. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFDC recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice regarding the requested relief pertaining to CRDP and CRSC. The applicant contends that she was advised by her Physical Evaluation Board Liaison Officer (PEBLO) that she would be eligible for “concurrent receipt” of her DVA disabilities and her full disability pay, i.e., CRDP. Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS) is the office of primary responsibility for the CRDP program, and provides the following guidance on CRDP eligibility as it pertains to reserve retirees: - You are a reserve retiree with 20 qualifying years of service, with a VA disability rating of 50 percent or greater, and who has reached retirement age (60 years of age; can be reduced below age 60 by three months for each 90 days of active service performed during a fiscal year). - You are a disability retiree who earned entitlements to retired pay under any provision of law other than solely by disability, and have a VA disability rating of 50 percent or greater. The applicant has submitted two claims for CRSC, and both have been denied. Specifically, requesting her service-connected disability of PTSD be considered because it was incurred from her duties at the Dover mortuary. The CRSC program was established to provide compensation to certain retirees with Combat-Related disabilities that qualify under established criteria. Per 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. When making combat-related determinations for PTSD, the Board looks for instances of direct exposure to gunfire or mortar attack, or surviving an aircraft crash. PTSD “stressors” attributed to the death of individuals, where the member was not directly involved in the event that caused the death(s), do not quality for CRSC. Documentation provided does not indicate or confirm the applicant was directly exposed to a combat-related event. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFDC evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice regarding the requested relief pertaining to the applicant’s PTSD determined to be combat related, providing a higher disability rating, and having all service-connected conditions considered in her total disability rating. In addressing her desire to have her disability classified as combat related, AFPC/DPFD opines mortuary services are not unique to military service and, therefore, are not determined to meet the guidelines for granting combat related designation. Regarding the applicant’s contention she should be entitled to a higher military retirement rate based on current DVA medical disability rating evaluation vice the rating evaluation used for her discharge in 2013; Air Force disability boards must rate disabilities based on the member’s condition at the point in time of evaluation. It is the charge of the DVA to pick up where the military service must, by law, leave off. Under Title 38, the DVA may rate any service-connected condition based upon future employability or reevaluate based on changes in the severity of a condition. Reference the applicant’s request to have all her service-connected conditions considered in her total disability rating, the IPEB determined that the unfitting condition was PTSD and MDD, recurrent, moderate. There was no LOD determination for the applicant’s back and knee pain. The preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPFFF did not provide a recommendation, but offered information pertaining to the status of the applicant’s SBP issue. They determined the applicant had not been briefed on the SBP and failed to complete an SBP election prior to her retirement on 29 Dec 13. Absent an election, full spouse only SBP coverage was established by law. AFPC/DPFFF counseled the applicant on 4 Mar 15, on SBP, provided an SBP information package for review, and offered to prepare an administrative correction. The applicant advised their office she does not want to change her SBP at this time. DPFFF states the applicant may later submit a DD Form 149 for correction to her SBP if she believes it is in error. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFFF submission is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant refutes virtually every point made by the OPRs and argues that the discharge process is regulated by Active Duty (AD) with separate rules for D versus Reserve. In support of her response, the applicant recaptures the timeline and contentions provided in her 28 Aug 14, DD Form 149 application. She reiterates her dissatisfaction with the Air Force Reserve retirement process, continues to question the IPEB findings as they pertain to her disability compensation rating, and disagrees with the CRSC program determination that her PSTD resulting from her duty in the Dover Mortuary does not meet the basic eligibility requirements for CRSC. The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit G. 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, to include her rebuttal, in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force OPRs and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. We note that AFPC/DPFFF contacted the applicant, counseled her on the SBP and forwarded an SBP Information Package for her and her spouse’s review. Subsequently, AFPC/DPFFF offered to prepare an administrative correction, but the applicant stated she did not want to correct her SBP at this time. 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-2014-03701 in Executive Session on 9 Sep 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03701 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Aug 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPFDC, dated 17 Dec 14, w/atchs. Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPFD, dated 12 Nov 14. Exhibit E.  Email, AFPC/DPFFF, dated 4 Mar 15, w/atchs. Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Jul 15. Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 30 Jul 15, w/atchs.