Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02341
Original file (BC-2003-02341.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02341
            INDEX CODE:  108.07
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  service-connected  medical  conditions,  anxiety  disorder   and   knee
prosthesis,  be  assessed  as  combat  related  in  order  to  qualify   for
compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His conditions were  incurred  under  conditions  simulating  war.   He  was
trained for combat duty and was ready to go to combat.

His complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force  on  26
Mar 63.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of  technical  sergeant,
having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank  of  1  Aug  79.
He served as an Avionics Instruments Systems Technician  and  as  a  Medical
Laboratory Technician.  He voluntarily retired from the Air Force for  years
of service on 1 Sep 83, having served 20 years, 5  months,  and  6  days  on
active duty.

Current Department of Veterans Affairs  (DVA)  records  reflect  a  combined
compensable rating of 80% for his unfitting conditions.

His CRSC application was disapproved on 24 Jun 03 based upon the  fact  that
none of his service-connected  medical  conditions  were  determined  to  be
combat-related.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends  denial.   DPPD  states  although  he  as  treated  for
various medical conditions  throughout  his  career,  nothing  reflects  his
service-connected conditions were the direct result of an armed conflict  or
caused by an instrumentality of war.  The fact that a  member  may  incur  a
medical condition  during  a  period  of  war  or  while  performing  combat
operations  is  not  sufficient  evidence  to   support   a   combat-related
determination.  Military records must show a  definite  causal  relationship
between the armed conflict and the medical condition.  The  DPPD  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 12  Sep
03 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office  has
received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical  Consultant  recommends  denial.   The  Medical  Consultant
states a review of his service medical records finds no evidence of  trauma,
injuries, or exposures related  to  combat,  during  exercises  or  training
simulating  combat,  or  attributed  to  an  instrumentality  of  war.    He
participated as a human test subject in experimental stress in  low-pressure
chambers on  eight  occasions  without  complication.   Although  such  duty
qualifies as hazardous service, there is no evidence  his  service-connected
disabilities are even indirectly related to this service.
The Medical Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit E.

ODUSD(MPP)/Comp reviewed  the  applicant's  request  and  concurs  with  the
findings and recommendation of  the  BCMR  Medical  Consultant.   The  ODUSD
evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the  additional  Air  Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 30 Jul 04 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, 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 engaged in hazardous service,  in
the performance of duty under  conditions  simulating  war,  or  through  an
instrumentality of war, and  therefore,  do  not  qualify  for  compensation
under the CRSC Act.  We agree with the opinions and recommendations  of  the
Air Force offices of primary responsibility and  adopt  their  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 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-2003-
02341 in Executive Session on 6 Oct 04, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member
      Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 Jul 03.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 4 Sep 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Sep 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 7 Oct 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, ODUSD(MPP)/Comp, dated 21 Jul 04.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 30 Jul 04.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02466

    Original file (BC-2003-02466.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request applicant provided documents extracted from his medical records. There is no evidence of duty related back injury in the remaining medical documentation. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03103

    Original file (BC-2003-03103.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends denial. The fact that a member may incur a medical condition during a period of war or while performing combat operations is not sufficient evidence to support a combat-related determination. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 20 Jan 04.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03642

    Original file (BC-2003-03642.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Medical Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit E. ODUSD(MPP)/Comp reviewed the applicant's request and concurs with the findings and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02830

    Original file (BC-2003-02830.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02830 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: All of his service-connected medical conditions be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act. There are no service medical record entries for injuries...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02790

    Original file (BC-2003-02790.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02790 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical condition, degenerative arthritis of both hips, hearing loss, and tinnitus, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02090

    Original file (BC-2003-02090.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence he had active tuberculosis and no evidence of lung damage from tuberculosis. 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 engaged in hazardous service, in the performance of duty under conditions simulating war, or through an instrumentality of war, and therefore, do not qualify for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02865

    Original file (BC-2003-02865.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was diagnosed with MS during his 19th year of service. The Medical Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit E. ODUSD(MPP)/Comp reviewed the applicant's request and concurs with the findings and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02471

    Original file (BC-2003-02471.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    His CRSC application was disapproved on 11 Jul 03 based upon the preponderance of evidence that none of his service-connected conditions were determined to be combat-related _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends denial. DPPD states nothing in his medical records reflects he was exposed to Agent Orange. Exhibit G. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 30 Jul 04.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02870

    Original file (BC-2003-02870.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant states the applicant's back and knee problems do not qualify for the CRSC program; however, his diabetes, presumed under Title 38 to be service-connected due to Agent Orange, does qualify him for CRSC. We have been made aware that the portion of his request regarding his diabetes mellitus, Vietnam era (Agent Orange) presumptive has been granted by the CRSC board and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02874

    Original file (BC-2003-02874.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His medical records do not correctly reflect his injuries received while he was in Vietnam. In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement and documentation extracted from his medical records. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of...