RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01291
            INDEX CODE:  108.07
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 Oct 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected medical condition,  lung  condition,  be  assessed  as
combat related in  order  to  qualify  for  compensation  under  the  Combat
Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His condition is the result of exposure  to  jet  fuel,  several  glues  and
cleaning chemical agents required in making repairs  performing  his  duties
as an Aircraft Fuels Systems Mechanic.  He was eventually removed  from  the
career field due to medical complications.  His condition was caused  by  an
instrumentality of war.

In support of his request,  applicant  provided  a  personal  statement  and
documentation  associated  with  his   CRSC   application.    His   complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force  on  14
Aug 68.  He was progressively promoted to  the  grade  of  master  sergeant,
having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank  of  1  Mar  84.
He served as an Aircraft Fuel  System  Technician  and  a  Training  Systems
Technician.  He voluntarily retired from the Air Force on 31 Aug 92,  having
served 24 years and 17 days on active duty.

Available Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) records  reflect  a  combined
compensable rating of 40% for his unfitting conditions.

His CRSC application was disapproved on 15 Mar 05 and 31 Mar 05  based  upon
the fact that his service-connected medical condition was determined not  to
be combat-related.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.   DPPD  states  his  service  records  reflects
extensive  treatment  for  the  lung  condition;  however,  the  DVA  rating
decision indicates he handled jet fuel and other chemicals during the  first
part of his military career but no condition due to them  was  shown.   DPPD
agrees that he was exposed to fuel fumes and cleaning chemicals due  to  the
nature of his career field.  However, to provide a  favorable  determination
for CRSC, there must be evidence to confirm the exposure to fuel  fumes  and
cleaning  chemicals  led  to  his  condition  and  the  exposure  meets  the
parameters of being combat related.   There  is  no  evidence  that  clearly
states the exposure to fuel fumes and  chemical  cleaners  caused  his  lung
condition rather that other causes (such as his  smoking)  or  his  physical
makeup.  Additionally, exposure to fuel fumes and chemical cleaners  is  not
unique to military service or to combat situations, and is considered to  be
an industrial hazard rather than combat related.

The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states Public law 1078-314 defines  and  instrumentality  of  war.
The law identifies instances that "If the disability occurred  as  a  result
of exposure to fumes, gasses, or explosion of military ordinance,  vehicles,
material".  There is a causal relationship between  chemical  exposures  and
specific health outcomes. This causal relationship  is  also  a  requirement
for Instrumentality of War criteria.

His complete responses, with attachments, are at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical  Consultant  recommends  denial.   The  Medical  Consultant
states applicant had recurrent spontaneous pneumothorax.  The  condition  is
reported on nonsmoking individuals with no  inhalational  exposures  and  is
attributed to the formation of small bulla or blebs typically  it  the  tops
of the lungs unrelated to  underlying  lung  disease.   Inhalation  of  fuel
fumes alone is not a cause of spontaneous  pneumothorax;  however,  if  such
inhalation resulted in chronic lung disease then the condition may occur  as
a result of severe disease.  At the time of  pulmonary  evaluation  in  1986
after all three pneumothoracies had occurred,  there  was  not  evidence  of
asthma or occupational lung disease.  Pulmonary function  testing  performed
by the DVA is consistent with obstructive lung disease that could be due  to
the combination of his smoking  and  chronic  inhalation  of  lung  irritant
fumes in the work area.  His lung condition was not  incurred  as  a  direct
result of combat or conditions simulating combat.  He  did  not  participate
in hazardous service and  was  not  exposed  to  Agent  Orange  (spontaneous
pneumothorax is not associated with exposure to Agent Orange).  There is  no
evidence that exposure to jet fuels was the direct cause  of  his  recurrent
spontaneous  pneumothorax  and  exposure  to   jet   fuel   during   routine
maintenance duties is not a qualifying circumstance.  Jet engine fuels,  the
various chemicals used in military aircraft maintenance, exhaust  fumes  and
dusts in the work environment are not instrumentalities of war  and  do  not
differ from the industrial risks inherent in civil aviation.

The Medical Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant responded that he was a smoker during  a  period  of  service  but
performed the fuel system duties for  18  years.   These  duties  were  also
performed during mobility and tactical training exercises at temporary  duty
and occasionally at remote locations.  He performed the duties until it  was
recommended  he  retrain  into  another  career  field  in  order  to  avoid
continual exposures.  His duties were performed under  marginal  respiratory
conditions as stated in his physician's recommendation for  removal  of  the
duties.   His  condition   may   be   caused   by   smoking   and   can   be
caused/exacerbated   by   exposure   to   vapors,   irritants,   and   fumes
independently of smoking.  Smoking and occupational exposures such as  fumes
can place a person at risk of  developing  lung  conditions.   Therefore,  a
causal effect seems to  logically  exist.   He  has  no  family  history  of
respiratory problems.

His complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

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
condition the applicant believes is combat-related was 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, does  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-2005-
01291 in Executive Session on 15 May 06, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member
      Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Apr 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 10 May 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 May 05.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 17 May 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 19 Apr 06.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 18 Apr 06.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 27 Apr 06, w/atchs



                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair