IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 9 February 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220007609 APPLICANT REQUESTS: •Reversal of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) denial of CombatRelated Special Compensation (CRSC) •A personal appearance before the Board APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: •DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)•Veteran Service Office, 1 April 2022•HRC letter, 28 May 2021•Army CRSC Reference Guide, 10 August 2017•Email•VA Form 21-4138 (Statement in Support of Claim), 1 April 2022•HRC, Army Service Center letter, 19 January 2022•CRSC Reconsideration Request Form, 11 January 2022•DD Form 2860 (Claim for CRSC)•Family Innovations letter, 15 March 2021•DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), ending on 1 August 2007•Orders Number C-07-790396A01, 11 July 2007•DA Form 1506 (Statement of Service – For Computation of Length of Service for Pay Purposes), 25 September 2003•Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) – Rating Decision, 30 January 2008•DVA – Rating Decision, 22 June 2018•DVA – Rating Decision, 7 December 2018•Excerpt PTSD Initial Disability Benefits Questionnaire•Memorandum for Record (MFR) – Subject: PTSD Medical Evaluation Board(MEB) Requirement – Statement Addressing Observations of the Applicant during OIF, 6 November 2006•Memorandum – Subject: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) MEB Requirement – Statement Addressing Observations of the Applicant during OIF, 2 November 2006•Medical documents •Retiree Account Statement, 24 August 2020 •DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Dischargefrom Active Duty), 8 September 1992 •Privacy Act Release •HRC letter, 12 August 2008 •DD Form 2860, 26 June 2008 •DVA – Rating Decision, 14 August 2008 •DVA letter, 30 October 2013 •DVA letter, March 20, 2008 FACTS: 1.The applicant states in pertinent part that he sustained injuries resulting from hisservice overseas that should meet the requirements for entitlement to CRSC. He waspreviously denied compensation by HRC. 2.A review of the applicant's available service records reflects the following: a.On 22 April 1980, the applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG). b.On 29 December 1981, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army to serve as a95B (Military Policeman). c.On 11 December 1984, the applicant was released from active duty andtransferred into the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement). d.On 1 July 1985, the applicant was ordered to active duty. e.On 12 June 1986, the applicant was released from active duty. f.On 18 June 1986, the applicant was awarded the 97E (Interrogator) MilitaryOccupational Specialty (MOS). g.On 10 August 1990, the applicant was awarded the 37F (PsychologicalOperations Sergeant) MOS. h.On 27 December 1990, the applicant was ordered to active duty in support ofOperation Desert Shield/Desert Storm. i.On 17 May 1991, the applicant was released from active duty. j.On 15 March 1996, the applicant enlisted in the ARNG. k.On 2 October 1996, the applicant was awarded the 93P (Aviation OperationsSpecialist) MOS. l.On 17 May 1999, the applicant was ordered to active duty. m.On 27 August 1999, the applicant was awarded the 79T (Recruiting andRetention Non-Commissioned Officer) MOS. n.On 27 September 2002, the applicant was released from active duty. o.On 12 February 2003, the applicant was ordered to active duty in support ofOperation Enduring Freedom (OEF). p.On 17 September 2003, the applicant was released from active duty after servingin Iraq from March 2003 – August 2003 in support of OEF. q.On 25 September 2003, the applicant enlisted in the USAR (ActiveGuard/Reserve (AGR)) program. r.On 23 May 2007, a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) convened to consider 3medically disabling conditions, Chronic Bronchitis, Prosthetic Joint Surface Replacement (Right Hip) and Major Depressive Disorder. DA Form 199 (PEB Proceedings) shows his disabilities did not result from a combat related injury as defined by Title 10, United States Code, section 104. The PEB found him physically unfit and recommended placement on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) with reexamination in November 2008. s.On 1 August 2007, the applicant was medically retired and placed on the TDRL. t.On 26 June 2008, the applicant applied for CRSC. u.On 12 August 2008, HRC, CRSC Division acknowledged receipt of theapplicant's claim for CRSC. Based on review of the provided documentation, they were unable to determine if his disabilities (Bronchitis, Degenerative Arthritis of the Spine, Left Forearm Condition, Right Hip Prosthesis, Hypertension, Bilateral Restless Leg Syndrome, Organic Mental Disorder, Sleep Apnea Syndrome) resulted from a combat related situation. v.On 6 November 2008, HRC, CRSC Division acknowledged receipt of theapplicant's request for reconsideration for CRSC. Based on review of the provided documentation, they were again unable to determine if his disabilities (Nervous Tic was added) resulted from a combat related situation. w.On 10 September 2009, a PEB convened to consider 3 medically disablingconditions: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), Right Hip Pain/Stiffness and PTSD. The board again confirmed that the applicant was physically unfit for continued military service and recommended that he be permanently retired with a disability rating of 70 percent. x.On 1 October 2009, the U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) issuedOrders Number D274-01 removing the applicant from the TDRL and permanently retiring him, effective 1 October 2009. y.On 13 May 2019, the HRC, Army Personnel Records Division, CRSC programoffice reviewed the applicant's submitted appeal for compensation. Based on review of the provided documentation, they were again unable to award compensation for his PTSD, Status Post Right Hip Total Arthroplasty with Residual Scar, Degenerative Changes of the Lumbar Spine, Hypertension, Fractured Left Ulna, Bilateral Restless Leg Syndrome and Sleep Apnea with Chronic Bronchitis claims because the documentation submitted made no mention of a combat-related event in relationship to these disabilities. This determination was deemed final. z.On 28 May 2021, HRC, Soldier Programs and Services Division advised theapplicant that he had previously received his final CRSC determination letter on 13 May 2019 and therefore they were unable to process his newly submitted request. The applicant was then advised that if he disagreed with this determination he had the right to appeal to this Board. aa. On 10 March 2022, HRC, CRSC Division advised the applicant that he had previously received his final CRSC determination letter on 13 May 2019 and therefore they were unable to process his newly submitted request. The applicant was then advised that if he disagreed with this determination; he had the right to appeal to this Board. 3.The applicant provides: a.Army CRSC Reference Guide dated 10 August 2017, reflective of combat-relatedsituations vs. non-combat related situations examples. b.Email reflective of the applicant being advised that the CRSC decision previouslyreceived was final, however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records could reconsider his application if he submitted material not previously presented. c.VA Form 21-4138 dated 1 April 2022, reflective of the applicant's disagreementwith the decision to deny his claim for CRSC. He notes that he served as an interrogator while in the Army and deployed several times. He believes that the development of his current mental health condition is directly related to his multiple deployments and should therefore fall into the category of "hazardous service." d.HRC, Army Service Center letter, dated 19 January 2022, reflective of theiracknowledged receipt of the applicants CRSC claim. e.CRSC Reconsideration Request Form, dated 11 January 2022, reflective of theapplicant's request for reconsideration of his previously submitted claim based upon new evidence related to his diagnosed PTSD. f.DD Form 2860 reflective of the applicant's submitted request for CRSC basedupon his hazardous service in the Army during the Gulf War and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)/OEF. In support of this claim, the applicant also provides a statement defining his responsibilities as an interrogator serving in support of OIF/OEF, the hip injury that he sustained while in Baghdad which required him to be evacuated to Kuwait. The causative event is not noted. The applicant also makes reference to his diagnosed PTSD. This letter is further provided in its entirety for the Board's review within the supporting documents. g.Family Innovations letter dated 15 March 2021, reflective of a synopsis of theoutpatient treatment the applicant received between July 2014 and March 2021, to address his PTSD. The applicant advised his therapist that he was deployed twice, once from December 1990 – June/July 1991 and again from February 2003 – August 2004. This letter is further provided in its entirety for the Board's review within the supporting documents. h.Orders Number C-07-790396A01 dated 11 July 2007, reflective of OrdersNumber C-07-790396 (TDRL Orders) being amended to reflect the following: •Disability Retirement – 13 years, 1 month, and 16 days •Section 1405 Service – 15 years, 1 month, and 8 days •Basic pay – 27 years, 3 months, and 10 days i.DA Form 1506 dated 25 September 2003, reflective of verification of theapplicant's military service from 1980 – 2003. j.DVA – Rating Decision dated 30 January 2008, reflective of the applicant's ratedmedical conditions, the percentage awarded for each and the justification supporting the determinations made. The documents are void of any evidence clearly defining a combat related condition. Based upon the severity of the applicant's service-connected rated conditions, he was deemed "unemployable," effective 2 August 2007. These documents are further provided in their entirety for the Board's review within the supporting documents. k. DVA – Rating Decision date 22 June 2018, reflective of the applicant's rated medical conditions, the percentage awarded for each and the justification supporting the determinations made. The documents clarify service-connected conditions occurring during combat and peacetime operations, but do not define a causative action or event. These documents are further provided in their entirety for the Board's review within the supporting documents. l. DVA – Rating Decision dated 7 December 2018 reflective of the applicant's rated medical conditions, the percentage awarded for each and the justification supporting the determinations made. The documents clarify service-connected conditions occurring during combat and peacetime operations, but do not define a causative action or event. These documents are further provided in their entirety for the Board's review within the supporting documents. m. Excerpt PTSD Initial Disability Benefits Questionnaire, reflective of the symptoms and diagnostic criteria considered when determining the applicant's diagnosed PTSD. n. Memorandum – Subject: PTSD MEB Requirement – Statement Addressing Observations of the Applicant during OIF dated 6 November 2006, reflective of the applicant's former commander's statement with regard to his service in Iraq (2003). Captain provides that the applicant sustained a physical injury while in Iraq but is unable to verify any situation that would cause his PTSD during his deployment. He also denies engagement in any major or minor battles during their deployment. o. Memorandum – Subject: PTSD MEB Requirement – Statement Addressing Observations of the Applicant during OIF dated 2 November 2006, reflective of the applicant's former first sergeant's statement with regard to his service in Iraq (2003). First Sergeant denies awareness of the applicant experiencing any severe or additional stress beyond what all other deployed Soldiers experienced. He adds that the applicant spent the majority of their deployment in Kuwait due to hip pain that he was experiencing. He also denies involvement in any insurgency actions such as Improvised Explosive Devices, sniper fire, etc. p. Medical documents previously provided to the PEB/Medical Evaluation Board and further utilized to determine his fitness for duty. Contained within are self-authored statements from other Soldiers deployed to Iraq with the applicant expressing their account of events occurring while deployed. Further review of the documentation provides reference to events which may have contributed to the applicant's mental health condition. The applicant advised medical staff that while he was serving in Iraq, he sustained a twisting injury to his hip and back while erecting a tent. He was placed on a physical performance limiting profile in result. These documents are further provided in their entirety for the Board's review within the supporting documents. q.Retiree Account Statement, 24 August 2020, reflective of the applicant'sretirement pay and entitlements. r.DD Form 215 dated 8 September 1992, reflective of the applicant's DD Form 214for the period ending on 17 May 1991, being corrected to reflect changes in his last unit of assignment, MOS, authorized awards and service dates in Southwest Asia to reflect 14 January 1991 – 25 April 1991. s.Privacy Act Release, reflective of the applicant's request for assistance from hisState Congressional representative with obtaining his entitlement to CRSC. t.DD Form 2860 dated 26 June 2008, reflective of the applicant's submittedrequest for CRSC entitlement reconsideration based upon his recently diagnosed PTSD with cognitive disorder condition. The applicant indicates that this condition is the result of armed conflict. The applicant also indicates that his hip injury was sustained in April 2003, when he was assisting with the setup of a General Purpose Medium tent during high winds. u.DVA – Rating Decision dated 14 August 2008, reflective of the applicant's ratedmedical conditions, the percentage awarded for each and the justification supporting the determinations made. The documents are void of any evidence clearly defining a combat related condition. Based upon the severity of the applicant's service-connected rated conditions, he was deemed "unemployable," effective 2 August 2007. These documents are further provided in their entirety for the Board's review within the supporting documents. v.DVA letter dated 30 October 2013, reflective of a response letter provided to theapplicant concerning the neuropsychology consultation results. It was noted that his mental health and hip condition were assessed in 2008 which led to the determination of individual unemployability. The letter further addresses contributing factors and symptoms related to his poor quality of sleep and mental health. The applicant was encouraged to continue with his regular medical and mental health follow-ups. w.DVA letter dated 20 March 2008, reflective of the applicant being advised of anadjustment to his disability compensation to include his children, effective 2 August 2007. 4.Review of the applicant's available service records are void of evidence of anyindividually combat related awards or decorations for heroism to include the CombatAction Badge or the Purple Heart. MEDICAL REVIEW: The Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor was asked to review this case. Documentation reviewed included the applicant’s ABCMR application and accompanying documentation, the military electronic medical record (AHLTA), the VA electronic medical record (JLV), the electronic Physical Evaluation Board (ePEB), the Medical Electronic Data Care History and Readiness Tracking (MEDCHART) application, and the Interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS). The ARBA Medical Advisor made the following findings and recommendations: a.The applicant is applying to the ABCMR requesting they reverse the United StatesArmy Physical Disability Agency’s and the United States Army Human Resources Command’s (USA HRC) previous determinations that his mental health and right hip conditions were non-combat related and therefore not eligible for Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC). The applicant is a former 37F (psycological operations specialist) believes they were due to “hazardous service” and should therefore be found combat related. He states in part: “The people I interviewed as part of my duties were although Iraqi and Kuwaiti nationals, human beings caught up in unimaginable horror as decades of deprivation and abuse had now led to the reality of a battlefield on their doorstep. I was unable to emotionally distance myself from their suffering: each abandoned and bloody child reminded m of my own infants back home ... In April, 2003 I suffered a profound injury which tore the cartilage lining of my hip, and had to be evacuated back to Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, our Head Quarters rear. The Army PA {physician assistant} misdiagnosed my injury as a "groin strain" in the opposite hip and after a month of 'recuperation' I rejoined my unit at Bagdad International Airport ...” b.The Record of Proceedings details the applicant’s military service and thecircumstances of the case. c.His Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings (DA Form 199) dated 23 May2007 shows he was determined to have three unfitting conditions for continued service: “Chronic bronchitis”, “Prosthetic joint surface replacement, right hip”, and “Major depressive disorder …with elements of PTSD.” The PEB made the administrative determinations that none of the applicant’s unfitting medical conditions was combat related: They found no evidence that any of these disabilities was the direct result of armed combat; was related to the use of combat devices (instrumentalities of war); the result of combat training; incurred while performing extra hazardous service though not engaged in combat; incurred while performing activities or training in preparation for armed conflict in conditions simulating war; or that he was a member of the military on or before 24 September 1975. The PEB noted on his DA 199: “The Soldier's retirement is not based on disability from injury or disease received in the line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict or caused by an instrumentality of war and incurring in line of duty during a period of war as defined by law;” and “The disability did not result from a combat related injury as defined in 26 U.S.C. 104.” d.His combined military disability rating was 60%, and with one or more of hisconditions be unstable for final rating, he was placed on the Temporary Disability Retirement List. e.His TDRL DA 199 shows the three conditions continued to be unfitting and yieldeda combined military disability rating of 70%. With all conditions having been determined stable for acting purposes, it was recommended the applicant be permanently retired for physical disability. After being counseled on the Board’s finding and recommendation by his PEB liaison officer, the applicant concurred with the PEB’s findings, waived his right to a formal hearing, and declined to request a VA reconsideration of his disability ratings. f.CRSC as described on the United States Army Human Resources Commandwebsite: “Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) is a form of concurrent receipt which is paid monthly. It restores military retired pay that is offset when a Military Retiree accepts compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for a disability or condition that can be attributed to a combat-related event as defined by the Department of Defense (DoD) program guidance. This allows eligible Retirees to concurrently receive an amount equal to or less than their length of service retirement pay and their VA disability compensation, if the injury is combat-related.” g.Combat-related disability for CRSC is defined in 10 U.S.C. § 1413a(e) as adisability that is "attributable to an injury for which the member was awarded the Purple Heart" or was incurred "as a direct result of armed conflict," ''through an instrumentality of war," "while engaged in hazardous service," or "in the performance of duty under conditions simulating war." h.Section b(3) of 26 U.S. Code § 104 requires there be a cause-and-effectrelationship: (3)Special rules for combat-related injuries: For purposes of this subsection, theterm “combat-related injury” means personal injury or sickness— (A)which is incurred— (i)as a direct result of armed conflict, (ii)while engaged in extra-hazardous service, or (iii)under conditions simulating war; or (B)which is caused by an instrumentality of war. i.There are no theater AHLTA encounters. Noted in his 28 March 2007 medicalevaluation board summary is the onset of his right hip condition and mental health condition: “The patient is a 43-year-old male who was in Iraq in 2003 when he was erecting a tent. He states he had a twisting inu ry to his back and right hip and since that time has had pain.” “Posttraumatic stress disorder, chronic, as manifested by the patient's deployment to Iraq, both during Desert Storm and more recently during the recent campaigns in Iraq. He was exposed to traumatic events, including charred bodies, seeing injured Iraqis and stress regarding threatening children and pointing his weapons at them. There were numerous times that he did feel that death and serious injury were imminent, not only to himself but many others as well, including the Iraqis.” j.Paragraph 630602 of DoD FMR 7000.14-R Volume 7B Chapter 63 CRSC defineshazardous service: “Hazardous service is service that includes, but is not limited to, aerial flight, parachute duty, demolition duty, experimental stress duty, and diving duty. A finding that a disability is the result of hazardous service requires that the injury or disease be the direct result of actions taken in the performance of such service.” k.There is no evidence his hip was injured during such service and neither the act ofperforming an interrogation nor being esxposed ot the aftermaths of combat qualify for hazardous service under CRSC guidelines. l.To award CRSC for PTSD, the claimant must submit official documentation thatshows how the condition is combat related as defined by CRSC program guidance. Official documentation includes wartime chain of command endorsements which confirms exposure to armed conflict (Wartime chain of command must be First Sergeant and/or Company Commander or higher), copies of combat decorations (certificates, combat badges, and DA Form 638s), and evaluation reports which support exposure to armed conflict. m.The applicant is not in receipt of a Purple Heart and no corroboratingdocumentation was found. A note in paragraph 630502 of DoD FMR 7000.14-R Volume 7B Chapter 63 CRSC notes the requirement for documentation, stating in part: “An uncorroborated statement in a record that a disability is combat-related will not, by itself, be considered determinative for purposes of meeting the combat-related standards for CRSC prescribed herein. CRSC determinations must be made based on the program criteria.” n.It is the opinion of the ARBA medical advisor there is insufficient probativeevidence upon which to reverse the previous non-combat related determinations for his right hip condition and/or mental health condition, and thus such a reversal would be unwarranted. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1.The Board found the available evidence sufficient to consider this case fully andfairly without a personal appearance by the applicant. 2.The Board found insufficient evidence indicating any of the applicant’s disablingconditions were “combat-related” as that term is defined for the purpose of CRSC.Based on a preponderance of the evidence, the Board determined HRC’s denial of theapplicant’s CRSC claim was not in error or unjust. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :X :X :X DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. Microsoft Office Signature Line... I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. REFERENCES: 1.Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation, Volume 7B: a.Section 630301 states a member may not be paid CRSC unless he or she hasapplied for and elected to receive compensation under the CRSC program by filing an application on DD Form 2860 (Claim for CRSC), with the Military Department from which he or she retired. A member may submit an application for CRSC at any time and, if otherwise qualified for CRSC, compensation will be paid for any month after May 2003 for which all conditions of eligibility were met. b.Section 630502 states a combat-related disability is a disability with an assignedmedical diagnosis code from the VA Schedule Rating of Disabilities (VASRD). The Military Departments will determine whether a disability is combat-related based on the following criteria: • 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 c. The Department will record for each disability determined to be combat-related which of the circumstances provided qualifies the disability as combat-related. A determination of combat-relatedness (see section 6306) will be made with respect to each separate disability with an assigned medical diagnosis code from the VASRD. A retiree may have disabilities that are not combat-related. Such disabilities will not be considered in determining eligibility for CRSC or the amount of CRSC payable. An uncorroborated statement in a record that a disability is combat-related will not, by itself, be considered determinative for purposes of meeting the combat-related standards for CRSC prescribed herein. CRSC determinations must be made on the basis of the program criteria. d. Section 6306 (Determinations of Combat Relatedness): (1) Direct Result of Armed Conflict: (a) The disability is a disease or injury incurred in the line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict. To support a combat-related determination, it is not sufficient to only state the fact that a member incurred the disability during a period of war, in an area of armed conflict, or while participating in combat operations. There must be a definite causal relationship between the armed conflict and the resulting disability. (b) Armed conflict includes a war, expedition, occupation of an area or territory, battle, skirmish, raid, invasion, rebellion, insurrection, guerilla action, riot, or any other action in which Service members are engaged with a hostile or belligerent nation, faction, force, or with terrorists. (c) Armed conflict may also include such situations as incidents involving a member while interned as a prisoner of war or while detained against his or her will in custody of a hostile or belligerent force, or while escaping or attempting to escape from such confinement, prisoner of war, or detained status. (2) While Engaged in Hazardous Service. Hazardous service is service that includes, but is not limited to, aerial flight, parachute duty, demolition duty, experimental stress duty, and diving duty. A finding that a disability is the result of such hazardous service requires that the injury or disease be the direct result of actions taken in the performance of such service. Travel to and from such service, or actions incidental to a normal duty status not considered hazardous, are not included. (3) In the Performance of Duty Under Conditions Simulating War. In general, performance of duty under conditions simulating war covers disabilities resulting from military training, such as war games, practice alerts, tactical exercises, airborne operations, leadership reaction courses, grenade and live fire weapon practice, bayonet training, hand-to-hand combat training, repelling, and negotiation of combat confidence and obstacle courses. It does not include physical training activities such as calisthenics, jogging, formation running, or supervised sport activities. (4) Instrumentality of War: (a) There must be a direct causal relationship between the instrumentality of war and the disability. It is not required that a member's disability be incurred during an actual period of war. The disability must be incurred incident to a hazard or risk of the service. (b) An instrumentality of war is a vehicle, vessel, or device designed primarily for Military Service and intended for use in such Service at the time of the occurrence or injury. It may also include such instrumentality not designed primarily for Military Service if use of or occurrence involving such instrumentality subjects the individual to a hazard peculiar to Military Service. Such use or occurrence differs from the use or occurrence under similar circumstances in civilian pursuits. (c) A determination that a disability is the result of an instrumentality of war may be made if the disability was incurred in any period of service as a result of such diverse causes as wounds caused by a military weapon, accidents involving a military combat vehicle, injury or sickness caused by fumes, gases, or explosion of military ordnance, vehicles, or materiel. (d) For example, if a member is on a field exercise, and is engaged in a sporting activity and falls and strikes an armored vehicle, then the injury will not be considered to result from the instrumentality of war (armored vehicle) because it was the sporting activity that was the cause of the injury, not the vehicle. On the other hand, if the individual was engaged in the same sporting activity and the armored vehicle struck the member, then the injury would be considered the result of an instrumentality of war. 2. Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation, Volume 7b, Chapter 63 Section 630104 (Relationship to Other Provisions) provides that since CRSC is not retired pay, it is not subject to the provisions of Title 10, USC, section 1408 relating to payment of retired or retainer pay in compliance with court orders. CRSC is also not subject to any survivor benefit provisions under Title 10, USC, Chapter 73. 3. AR 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR)) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing or request additional evidence or opinions. Additionally, it states in paragraph 2-11 that applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. //NOTHING FOLLOWS//