RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03786 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service connected disabilities be re-evaluated under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Traditionally, federal law prohibits concurrent receipt of both Veteran’s Affairs (VA) disability and military retirement. He had to waive military retirement for VA disability while on the Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL). Retiring as an E6 with 15 years of service, he had to waive his military retirement with an 80 percent disability which was approved by the Air Force Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). It is understood a 15 year E6 would be adjusted to E6 with 20 years honorable service. This was proposed for medical retirement conditions beyond the member’s control. All honors should be vested to that veteran in that situation. There are no retirement benefits for the roughly 83 percent of troops who leave service before reaching 20 years whether or not retirement was advocated for. In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was medically retired effective 15 July 2002 in the grade of technical sergeant/E6. A DVA Rating decision dated 25 May 2001 listed the applicant’s service connected disabilities as: Multiple Sclerosis (MS) with fatigue, dizziness, right lower/left lower/right upper/left upper extremities impairment with abnormal gait and positive Romberg’s, urinary frequency and urgency due to MS; loss of sense and taste, loss of smell, post-traumatic headaches due to head injuries. His overall combined evaluation rating was 90 percent. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force which is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial. The applicant submitted a claim for CRSC which was disapproved on 17 June 2008. He requested reconsideration of the Board’s disapproval. That request was denied on 18 July 2011. There was no evidence the applicant’s disabilities were a direct result of an armed conflict, hazardous service, and instrumentality of war or simulating war. The CRSC program was established to provide compensation to certain retirees with combat-related disabilities under Title 10 U.S.C, Section 1413a. If the veteran does not satisfy the preliminary CRSC criteria, no further consideration is required and the claim is denied. The VA awards service connected disabilities based on their standards. While service connected disability is required for initial eligibility for CRSC consideration, CRSC criteria is more stringent and requires documentation to support a qualifying combat-related event as the direct cause of the disability. In his original claim, the applicant states his face was injured during mandatory strength training (weight training). He claims he dropped a bar bell on his face while lifting weights. The VA found his injuries to be service connected and rated his loss of sense of taste and smell, post-traumatic headaches and fractures of nasal and orbital bones as related to the head injury. Injuries sustained from dropping a bar bell on one’s face are not approvable for CRSC. The applicant does not state why he feels his MS conditions meet CRSC criteria. The DVA rating decision awards his MS with fatigue, dizziness, numbness of torso and head, right lower extremity impairment with abnormal gait and positive Romberg’s, right upper/left upper/left lower extremity impairment and urinary infrequency. By law, determination of whether a disability is combat related will be based on the preponderance of available documentary evidence. The documentation provided does not reflect the applicant’s MS condition was caused by a combat-related event, rather his particular physical make-up. The applicant’s conditions do not meet the mandatory criteria for compensation under the CRSC program as outlined under the provisions of Title 10 U.S.C, Section 1413a. While the conditions meet the VA criteria for service-connection, they were not caused by combat-related events. The complete DPSDC evaluation is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 13 January 2012, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this date, this office has not received a response. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. The applicant has requested that his service medical records be re-evaluated under the CRSC program. However, we do not find the applicant’s service-connected medical conditions were the 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. As such, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant’s condition does not meet the mandatory criteria for compensation under the CRSC program. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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-2011-03786 in Executive Session on 5 March 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Sep 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSDC, dated 3 Jan 12, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Jan 12.