Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03976
Original file (BC-2006-03976.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03976
            INDEX CODE:  108.07

            COUNSEL:  NONE
                 HEARING DESIRED: NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  1 AUGUST 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Approval of a Combat-Related  Special  Compensation  (CRSC)  application  be
made in her late husband’s name.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her late husband was too ill to file a CRSC claim  before  his  death.   She
could not file it for him, since he required around-the-clock care.

In support of her request,  the  applicant  provides  a  copy  of  her  late
husband’s death certificate.  Her complete submission, with  attachment,  is
at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 April 1977, the veteran retired from the Air  Force  in  the  grade  of
master sergeant, after serving 23 years and 14 days on active duty.

The veteran died on 2 August 2006.  CRSC is  not  subject  to  any  survivor
benefit provisions; therefore, the widow’s (the applicant) CRSC request  was
disapproved on 29 November 2006.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPDC recommends denial.  DPPDC advises that CRSC  is  not  subject  to
any survivor benefit provisions under Chapter 73, Title  10,  United  States
Code.  Although the veteran would have qualified for CRSC, DPPDC  is  unable
to approve the request for compensation  because  the  application  was  not
made prior to the veteran’s death.  The  DPPDC  complete  evaluation  is  at
Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  23
March 2007 for review and comment within 30 days.  As  of  this  date,  this
office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  After a thorough review of  the  available
evidence of record, the applicant’s  request  for  compensation  under  CRSC
does not meet  the  mandatory  criteria  for  compensation  under  the  CRSC
program as outlined under the provisions of Title 10,  Chapter  71,  Section
1413a.  We therefore agree with the opinion and recommendation  of  the  Air
Force office of primary responsibility and, in the absence  of  evidence  to
the contrary, find no compelling 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-2006-
03976 in Executive Session on 17 May 2007, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                 Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member
                 Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member


The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2006-
03976 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Dec 06, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPDC, dated 19 Mar 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Mar 07.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01270

    Original file (BC-2006-01270.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01270 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: DAV HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 Oct 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late husband’s previously approved Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) be increased from 40% to 100% for prostate cancer (malignant growth genitourinary), effective 25 Jan 99, in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-00800

    Original file (BC-2006-00800.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00800 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 September 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Approval of a Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) application be made in her late husband’s name. Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. After a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03872

    Original file (BC-2005-03872.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since he lived less than one month following award of his DVA compensation, he would not have received a CRSC payment prior to his death. Therefore, we agree with the Air Force's opinion that since the former member would not have received CRSC payments, corrective action is not warranted in this case and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00503

    Original file (BC-2005-00503.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00503 INDEX NUMBER: 136.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 15 AUG 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late husband be entitled to benefits under the Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program. Has 20 or more years of active service in the Uniformed Services...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02678

    Original file (BC-2006-02678.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 1 October 1973, he retired from the Air Force in the grade of technical sergeant, after having served 20 years, 11 months and 9 days on active duty. After a thorough review of the evidence presented, it appears that the applicant’s request does not meet the mandatory criteria for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-00973

    Original file (BC-2006-00973.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    She voluntarily retired from the Air Force on 30 June 2000 after having served 24 years and 1 day on active duty. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01865

    Original file (BC-2005-01865.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    After the death of her husband, she became aware that his disability rating had been increased to 40% and applied for CRSC benefits on his behalf. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Jul 05. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-01865 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-00602

    Original file (BC-2006-00602.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DPPDC evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was sent to the applicant on 30 June 2006 for review and comment within 30 days. After a thorough review of the available evidence of record, it is our opinion that the service-connected medical conditions the applicant believes are combat-related were not incurred as the direct result of armed conflict, while...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03916

    Original file (BC-2005-03916.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of applicant’s request stating, in part, a review of the Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS) files and Air Force Military Personnel files indicates applicant was medically retired after 2 years, 10 months, and 17 days of active service. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | bc-2006-03828

    Original file (bc-2006-03828.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of applicant’s request stating, in part, a review of the Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS) files and Air Force Military Personnel files indicates applicant was medically retired after 9 years, 1 month, and 19 days of active service. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and...