AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00461 
COUNSEL: NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
1. His separation date be changed from 31 May 04 to 18 Aug 04.   
 
2. In  the  alternative,  the  Defense  Finance  and  Accounting 
Service  (DFAS)  be  directed  to  approve  Combat  Related  Special 
Compensation (CRSC) and Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay 
(CRDP) per Title 10, United States Code (USC). 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
1. He completed 19 years, 9 months and 14 days and feels that it 
is  an  injustice  not  to  be  allowed  to  complete  two  months  and 
15 days which would have given him 20 years of active service.   
 
2. He was not reasonable or competent at the time of his medical 
evaluation  board  (MEB)  or  discharge.    In  fact,  he  was  clearly 
unable  to  make  decisions,  agree  to  the  terms  of  his  retirement 
or  sign  any  legally  binding  documents.    He  was  misdiagnosed, 
under medicated and had no professional counseling for the issue 
which  he  was  discharged  (Mental  Health).    He  was  diagnosed  by 
the  Department  of  Veterans  Affairs  (DVA)  as  having  Post-
Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  
 
3. He was never informed that he would lose his entitlements to 
CRSC and CRDP because he retired prior to reaching 20 years of 
active  duty  service.    He  was  assured  the  Air  Force  “always” 
granted full retirement to personnel who were within 3 months of 
completing 20 years on active duty.  In his diminished capacity, 
he trusted what was said and signed the paperwork. 
 
4. There  was  no  mental  health  counselor  available  to  assist 
mental health patients in understanding the MEB process. 
 
In  support  of  his  request,  the  applicant  provides  a  personal 
statement,  copies  of  AF  Form  356,  Findings  and  Recommended 
Disposition  of  USAF  Physical  Evaluation  Board;  DD  Form  214, 
Certificate  of  Release  or  Discharge  from  Active  Duty;  Enlisted 
Performance Reports; AF Form 102, Inspector General Personal and 
Fraud,  Waste  and  Abuse  Complaint  Registration;  AF  Form  3070, 
Record  of  Non-judicial  Punishment  Proceedings,  and  other 
documentation associated with his request.  
 

The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
On  18  Feb  04,  a  MEB  convened  to  consider  the  applicant  for 
continued  active  duty.    The  board  recommended  the  applicant  be 
referred  to  an  Informal  Physical  Evaluation  Board  (IPEB)  for 
General Anxiety Disorder, existed prior to service (EPTS).    
 
On 15 Mar 04, the IPEB reviewed the case and found the applicant 
unfit  and  recommended  permanent  retirement  and  a  disability 
rating  of  30  percent.    On  31  Mar  04,  the  applicant  concurred 
with the findings and recommended disposition of the IPEB. 
 
On  31  May  2004,  the  applicant  was  permanently  retired  with  a 
disability rating of 30 percent.  He completed 19 years, 9 months 
and 14 days of active duty service.  

 On 1 Dec 04, the DVA awarded him a compensable disability rating 
of 10 percent for General Anxiety Disorder.  On 6 Sep 08 and 15 
Nov  10,  the  DVA  subsequently  raised  it  to  30  and  70  percent 
respectively.    In  addition,  he  was  granted  Individual 
Unemployability  for  a  total  compensable  disability  rating  of 
100 percent.   
 
On 8 Feb 12, the applicant applied for CRSC for anxiety disorder.  
On  28  Mar  12,  his  claim  was  disapproved.    No  evidence  was 
provided to confirm his disability was the direct result of armed 
conflict,  hazardous  service,  instrumentality  of  war,  or 
simulating war.   
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial of the applicant’s request that his 
anxiety  disorder  be  approved  for  CRSC.    DPSDC  states  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.    Simply  being 
involved in simulated combat operations, hazardous service or an 
instrumentality  of  war  is  not  sufficient  for  a  combat-related 
determination.    Documentation  does  not  confirm  his  anxiety 
disorder was caused by a specific combat-related event. 
 
The applicant feels his anxiety disorder meets the requirements 
for Hazardous Events, Simulating War and Instrumentality of War. 
In  his  original  request,  the  applicant  stated  his  anxiety 
disorder  was  the  result  of  repeated  traumatic  events  occurring 
over a period of 12 years to include: 
 

 

2 

  a. The loss of 13 C-130 aircraft in crashes and he knew some 
of the individuals who died.  
 
  b.  Dangerous  in-flight  emergencies  and  performing  loadmaster 
duties, including the preparation of human remains. 
 
  c. Upon being airborne and nearing completion of a functional 
check  flight,  the  aircraft  he  was  in  flew  higher  and  began  an 
accelerated  descent;  he  was  thrown  up  in  the  aircraft  hitting 
the roof with his head, buttock and feet, then fell 10 feet back 
to the floor. 
 
  d.  He  was  on  a  fully  loaded  and  fueled  aircraft  when,  after 
takeoff,  the  rudder  boost  pack  blew  a  hydraulic  seal  and  upon 
return the aircraft landed hard.   
 
In  regards  to  the  combat-related  criteria  of  Hazardous  Service 
and Simulating War, in accordance with (IAW) DD Form 2860, Claim 
for  Combat-Related  Special  Compensation, the fact that a member 
incurred  a  disability  during  a  period  of  Simulating  War,  in  an 
area  of  simulated  armed  conflict,  while  participating  in 
simulated  combat  operations  or  during  a  period  of  hazardous 
service is not sufficient by itself to support a combat-related 
determination.    There  must  be  a  definite,  documented,  casual 
relationship between the simulated armed conflict or HS and the 
resulting disability.   
 
When  making  combat-related  determinations  for  anxiety  disorders 
the  board  looks  for  instances  of  direct  exposure  to  a  combat-
related  event,  such  as  direct  exposure  to  gunfire  or  mortar 
attack,  or  surviving  an  aircraft  crash.    Anxiety  Disorder 
“stressors”  attributed  to  the  death  of  individuals,  where  the 
member  was  not  directly  involved  in  the  event  that  caused  the 
death(s) do not qualify for CRSC.  While the loss of co-workers 
and  the  handling  of  human  remains  is  certainly  traumatic,  this 
does not show a direct combat-related link sufficient to approve 
his  condition  for  CRSC.    The  individuals  on  the  aircraft  that 
crashed or the individuals who were injured or killed in combat 
demonstrate a direct link. 
 
While  the  board  concedes  the  applicant  did  perform  hazardous 
duties as a loadmaster, the issue at hand is whether a specific 
combat-related event was the direct cause of his condition.  The 
applicant’s  related  experiences  of  in-flight  emergencies  could 
be  potentially  approved  for  CRSC.    However,  by  law, 
determinations of whether a disability is combat-related will be 
based on the preponderance of available documentary information.  
The  documentation  provided  does  not  confirm  he  experienced  a 
combat-related  event  as  he  describes  or  that  his  anxiety 
disorder is the direct result of a combat-related event. 
 
While  the  applicant’s  conditions  meet  the  VA  requirements  for 
service-connected  compensation  (manifested  while  in  service), 
the  evidence  does  not  support  additional  compensation  under 

 

3 

CRSC.  The process and standards for determinations are governed 
under different guidance and the decision does not automatically 
qualify a disability as combat-related under current criteria.   
 
The  complete  DPSDC  evaluation,  with  attachments,  is  at  Exhibit 
C. 
 
AFPC/DPSD recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change 
his date of separation.  DPSD states the applicant is requesting 
his  DOS  be  changed  to  qualify  for  the  CRDP  Program.    CRDP  or 
“concurrent  receipt”  as  it  is  sometimes  referred  to  -  is  a 
phased-in restoration of the retired pay deducted from military 
retirees’  accounts  due  to  their  receipt  of  DVA  compensation.  
Retired  military  members  entitled  to  CDRP  automatically  began 
receiving benefits as of Jan 04.  Eligibility for CRDP requires 
at  least  20  years  of  creditable  service  IAW  10  U.S.C.  §1414(b) 
(1).   
 
DPSD states the applicant does not have the required 20 years of 
service time to apply for CRDP.   
 
The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit D. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
By undated letter, the applicant states his application is non-
traditional in that it deals with a psychological injury rather 
that  a  physical  injury.    The  applicant  states  his  updated 
information  will  help  explain  his  claim  and  justify  his 
inclusion in the CRSC program. 
 
The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit F.   
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
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 
is requesting his DOS be change from 31 May 04 to 18 Aug 04 in 
order  to  qualify  for  compensation  under  the  CRDP  and  CRSC  Act.   
After  a  thorough  review  of  the  evidence  of  record,  we  do  not 
find persuasive evidence that his DOS is in error or that he was 
not  afforded  all  the  rights  to  which  entitled  at  the  time  of 

 

4 

 

discharge.  While the applicant believes his discharge with less 
than  20  years  is  an  injustice,  we  do  not  agree.    He  has  not 
presented any evidence that supports his discharge for unfitness 
should  have  been  delayed.    In  our  view,  to  deliberately  delay 
his separation on the basis of allowing him to complete 20 years 
of  service  after  it  was  determined  he  was  no  longer  fit  would 
have  been  improper  and  afforded  him  rights  not  available  to 
others  similarly  situated.    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  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an 
error or injustice.  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  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-2012-00461  in  Executive  Session  on  14  Nov  12,  under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 
The  following  documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-00461 was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Jan 12, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Record. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSDC, dated 10 Apr 12, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 26 Apr 12. 
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 May 12. 
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant’s Response, undated. 
 
 
 
 
                                   Panel Chair 

Panel Chair 
Member 
Member 

  
  
  

 
 
 

 

5