RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04640 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

He be entitled to benefits under the Combat-Related Special 
Compensation (CRSC) program. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He has filed for CRSC and has been denied twice; once in Jun 09 
and again in Sep 10. Both times after submitting additional 
evidence, he was advised that the event was not a direct cause 
of his disability and that his claim did not meet the criteria 
for the CRSC program. He was later advised, after a submission 
that his injuries were not service-connected; however, he 
believes the Air Force is unjustly looking for reasons to deny 
his claim for CRSC. 

 

In support of his appeal, he provides an extract of his CRSC 
packages; his Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rating 
decision; a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty, issued in conjunction from his 
30 Mar 07 separation, and other medical documents associated 
with his request.. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant, a Reservist, was notified of his eligibility for 
Retired Pay at age 60, on 26 May 07. He earned 3528 points 
under the provisions of 10 USC 12731. His most recent 
DD Form 214, indicated that he completed 3 years, 11 months, and 
25 days during this period of active duty. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 


AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial stating, in part, that his 
condition does not meet the mandatory criteria for compensation 
under the CRSC program. 

 

The applicant submitted a CRSC claim for Post-Traumatic Stress 
Disorder (PTSD), back, neck, knees, left ankle, and tinnitus; 
however, his request was disapproved on 1 Jun 09. He requested 
reconsideration of his claim for his back, neck, knees, left 
ankle, and tinnitus; however, on 28 Sep 10, his claim was 
disapproved. The CRSC board concluded that no evidence was 
provided to confirm the applicant’s disabilities were the direct 
result of armed conflict, hazardous service, an instrumentality 
of war, or simulating war. 

 

The applicant states his disabilities were incurred while 
downloading military cargo while deployed to Kuwait. In 
accordance with DD Form 2860, Claim for Combat-Related Special 
Compensation (CRSC), the fact that a member incurred a 
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. 

 

Injuries from loading cargo, pushing pallets or getting caught 
between cargo pallets are not unique to military service or 
combat situations. Therefore, to qualify for CRSC, some combat-
related event must have occurred that caused or aggravated the 
injury. An example of a combat-related event could be the 
aircraft coming under enemy fire while unloading cargo, causing 
the loadmaster to take cover without securing the cargo, and the 
cargo pinning the member. Another example of a combat-related 
event could be an explosion causing the cargo to become 
unsecured and pin the member. After reviewing documentation we 
are unable to determine a combat-related event as the cause of 
the applicant’s disabilities. 

 

The Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program, 
established by Public Law (PL) 107-314, provides compensation to 
certain retirees with combat-related disabilities. A retired 
member of the Uniformed Services must meet each of the four 
following conditions to meet the preliminary CRSC criteria: 

 

 a. Has 20 or more years of active service in the Uniformed 
Services for the purpose of computing the amount of retired pay, 
or is entitled to retired pay under section 12731 of Title 10, 
United States Code, unless such retirement is under section 
12731b of that same title or (the member is retired under 
Chapter 61 (disability retired). 

 

 b. Is in retired status. 

 


 c. Is entitled to retired pay, notwithstanding that such 
retired pay may be reduced due to receipt of Department of 
Veterans Affairs (DVA) disability compensation. 

 

 d. Has qualifying disability ratings (percentages) 
[retiree must be entitled to compensation for service-connected 
disabilities under 10 USC 38 by the DVA]. 

 

 Qualifying Combat-Related Disability: Member has 
combat-related disabilities (which include any Purple Heart 
disabilities) that are compensated by the DVA. 

 

The complete AFPC/DPSDC 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 7 January 2011 for review and comment within 
30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office (Exhibit D). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation 
of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt its 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not 
been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 

 

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 issue(s) 
involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 


The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-
2010-04640 in Executive Session on 13 September 2011, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Dec 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSDC, dated 28 Dec 10, w/atch. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jan 11. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair