RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-00677
            INDEX CODE:  108.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX      COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  7 September 2008


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show the injuries  that  led  to  his  permanent
disability retirement were combat related and caused by  an  instrumentality
of war.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The documentation submitted to the Physical Evaluation Board  (PEB)  in  his
original package included a letter written by his the aircraft commander  in
which the commander states the aircrew was on a Joint Airlift  and  Tactical
Training (JAATT) mission to drop paratroops outside of Helena, Montana.   He
was injured during this mission and, such missions fall under  the  umbrella
of “instrumentality of  war”  and  also  as  a  “result  of  combat  related
injury.”

In support of his appeal, the applicant  provides  copies  of  his  aircraft
commander’s letter and AF Form 2683, Retirement Special Order  –  Physically
Unfit.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 30 March 1976, the applicant enlisted in  the  Air  Force  Reserve  (AFR)
with prior military service in  the  Regular  Army  and  Army  Reserve.   He
continuously served in the AFR in  positions  of  increasing  responsibility
attaining the rank of master sergeant with a date of rank of 1  March  1980.


On 11 January 1986, while performing annual training, the applicant  injured
his left shoulder during a flying mission when he was  thrown  up  into  the
air in extreme turbulence and after letting go of  the  troop  door  breaker
bar; he was thrown across the aircraft  into  other  crew  members.   On  27
January 1986, the applicant’s rotator cuff injury was determined  to  be  in
the line of duty.

The applicant’s records were evaluated by a Medical Evaluation  Board  (MEB)
on 17 December 1987.  The MEB diagnosed the applicant with a  right  rotator
cuff tear, chronic pain syndrome, and narcotic dependency secondary  to  the
rotator cuff injury.  The MEB referred the applicant’s file to be  evaluated
by the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB).  The IPEB findings,  dated
8 July 1988, found the applicant unfit  for  continued  service  because  of
permanent physical disability  rated  at  twenty  (20)  percent.   The  IPEB
recommended the applicant be discharged with severance pay.   The  applicant
disagreed with the IPEB findings and requested a Formal Physical  Evaluation
Board (FPEB).  The FPEB  findings,  dated  25  August  1988,  diagnosed  the
applicant with right rotator cuff injury, rated  at  a  fifty  (50)  percent
disability  rating;  right  lower  extremity  weakness  and   partial   foot
numbness, rated at a twenty (20) percent disability rating;  and  found  the
applicant  unfit  for  continued  service  because  of  permanent   physical
disability rated at sixty (60) percent.  Both the IPEB and  FPEB  found  the
medical conditions the applicant was boarded for were not combat-related  or
caused by an instrumentality of war.  On 26 September  1988,  the  applicant
disagreed with the FPEB findings and submitted a statement of rebuttal.

On 20 October 1988, the Secretary of the  Air  Force  (SECAF)  directed  the
applicant be placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL)  with  a
disability  rating  of  sixty  (60)  percent.   On  22  November  1988,  the
applicant was released from active service and placed on the TDRL.

Subsequent reviews of the applicant’s status on the TDRL  resulted  in  IPEB
findings, dated 15 May 1991, which  recommended  the  applicant’s  permanent
retirement with a fifty (50) percent disability rating.  The IPEB  indicated
the  applicant’s  condition  was  stable  and  his  TDRL  status  should  be
finalized.   FPEB  findings,  dated  5  July  1991,  found  the  applicant’s
condition was stable and  recommended  permanent  disability  retirement  at
seventy (70) percent.  On 5 July 1991,  the  applicant  disagreed  with  the
FPEB findings and submitted a statement of rebuttal.

On 17 October 1991, the Secretary of the Air Force  directed  the  applicant
be removed from the TDRL and placed  on  the  Permanent  Disability  Retired
List (PDRL) with  a  disability  rating  of  seventy  (70)  percent.   On  2
November 1991, the applicant was removed from the TDRL and  retired  in  the
grade of master sergeant with a seventy percent disability rating.   He  was
credited with 18 years, 7 months, and 21 days  of  satisfactory  service  of
which 5 years, 7 months, and 24 days was active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of the applicant’s  request.   DPPD  states  Air
Force Regulation (AFR) 35-4, section 3-44b (2) indicates: “Combat-Related  –
Extra Hazardous Service.  Assignment to a military occupation entitling  the
member to hazardous duty pay, such as parachute,  flight  deck,  demolition,
experimental stress, or leprosarium duty.  Flight duty may  be  included  if
it involves  other  than  routine  training  flights  and  there  is  enough
evidence of record to show extremely hazardous  duty  factor  was  present.”
In addition, AFR 35-4, section 3-43b indicates:   “Instrumentality  of  War.
This determination is made only when the physical defect  or  condition  was
caused by an instrumentality or war and was incurred in line of duty  during
a period of war and that defect or  condition,  standing  alone,  makes  the
member unfit.”  DPPD states the applicant’s Air  Force  Form  348,  Line  of
Duty Determination, indicates  he  was  performing  his  annual  tour  10-12
January 1986, while flying a routine  mission  which  does  not  fall  under
either section of AFR 35-4.

It is DPPD’s opinion that the preponderance of  evidence  reflects  that  no
error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s disability process or  at
the time of his retirement.

DPPD’s 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  27
April 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 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.  After a thorough review of  the  available
evidence of record, it is our opinion  that  the  service-connected  medical
conditions that resulted in the applicant’s disability retirement  were  not
combat-related or through an instrumentality of  war.   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  compelling  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 issues involved.   Therefore,  the  request  for  a
hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in  Executive
Session on 16 October 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. John B. Hennessey, Panel Chair
            Ms. Dee R. Reardon, Member
            Mr. Jeffery R. Shelton, Member


The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with  AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2007-00677:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Mar 06, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 12 Apr 07, w/atch.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Apr 07.




                                  JOHN B. HENNESSEY
                                                   Panel Chair