Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02188
Original file (BC-2007-02188.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02188
            INDEX CODE:  108.07
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His skin rash began during the Persian Gulf War  while  exposed  to  unknown
substances.

In support of his request, the applicant provided  documentation  associated
with his CRSC application.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force  on  11
October 1974.   He  was  progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of  master
sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank  of  1
December 1990.  He served as a Munitions Systems Craftsman.   On  31 October
1994, he was relieved from active duty and retired from  the  Air  Force  on
1 November 1994, having served 20 years and 20 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 19 June 2007  based  upon  the  fact
that his service-connected  medical  condition  was  determined  not  to  be
combat-related.

_________________________________________________________________





AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial.  DPSDC states  applicant  claimed  his  eczema
was incurred due to his Gulf War service.   At  present,  the  VA  does  not
recognize eczema as a presumptive condition for Gulf War service.  As  such,
they are unable to consider any disability claimed  as  presumptive  to  the
Gulf War that the VA  has  not  recognized.   Additionally,  his  VA  Rating
Decision letter dated 13 September 1995 states,  “the  veteran  was  treated
for nonspecific dermatitis on May 6, 1980,  and  hand  eczema  on  July  21,
1994.”  Applicant submitted a citation that states he  was  “TDY  to  USAFE,
PACAF, and the Mid-East Area of Operations from 18 August 1990 to  14  March
1991.”  Evidence suggests his  condition  existed  prior  to  his  Gulf  War
service.

When  considering  chronic  conditions,  such  as  eczema,  under  the  CRSC
guidelines, it may be difficult to determine that armed conflict,  hazardous
service, instrumentality of  war,  or  simulating  war  was  the  definitive
cause.  To be eligible for compensation, they must have documented  evidence
of a combat-related factor having  directly  caused  his  condition,  rather
than from routine causes  or  the  veteran’s  particular  physical  make-up.
While applicant’s condition meets the VA requirements for  service-connected
compensation, the evidence does not support  additional  compensation  under
CRSC.

The DPSDC complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 19 October 2007, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the
applicant for review and comment within 30 days (exhibit  D).   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.  The available evidence of record does  not
support  a  finding  that  the  service-connected  medical   condition   the
applicant believes is combat-related was 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 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 issue 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 an error or injustice; the application was  denied  without
a personal appearance; and 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-2007-
02188 in Executive Session on 28 April 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 June 2007, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSDC, dated 5 October 2007, w/atchs.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 October 2007.





                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01925

    Original file (BC-2007-01925.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial. The complete DPSDC evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that his unit was in direct support of an Army Infantry Division. The available evidence of record does not support a finding that the service-connected medical condition the applicant believes is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01876

    Original file (BC-2007-01876.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01876 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical conditions, intervertebral disc syndrome, paralysis of external popliteal nerve (left lower), paralysis of median nerve (left and right upper), bronchial asthma, sinusitis, and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02482

    Original file (BC-2007-02482.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although applicant believes his back condition is related to his boom operating duties, there is no in-service documentation that confirms a relationship between his aircrew in-flight refueling duties and this condition. 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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02372

    Original file (BC-2007-02372.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    After reviewing his personnel and medical records, DPPD found no evidence that he met the criteria above for combat-related radiation exposure. 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 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00072

    Original file (BC-2007-00072.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPD provides a review of the applicant’s medical records and states in order for these disabilities to be considered combat related, they must be specifically granted by the Veterans Administration (VA) as presumptive to AO exposure. 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 27 Apr 07 for review and comment within 30...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050006358C070206

    Original file (20050006358C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that all of his Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated disabilities be approved for Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC). Thus, one Gulf War veteran presenting with difficult-to-diagnose symptoms could be diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome, which cannot be service-connected under this law because it is a diagnosis. While the applicant has five disabilities which have been classified as Gulf War incurred, there is no evidence or indication that those...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016725

    Original file (20130016725.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). He indicates he can swear under oath that the patches are a direct result of combat or combat related training. Although the evidence shows the applicant was diagnosed with Degenerative Arthritis of the Spine, Left Spine, Eczema, and Tendon Inflammation Left Shoulder, unfortunately there is no evidence in the available record that shows these conditions were sustained as a direct result of armed...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04675

    Original file (BC-2011-04675.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    While service connection for disabilities is required for initial eligibility for CRSC consideration, CRSC criteria is more stringent and requires documentation to support a qualifying combat-related event as the “direct” cause of a disability. For hypertension to qualify for CRSC, it must be either secondary to a combat-related condition (such as diabetes or a heart condition contracted by exposure to Agent Orange) or presumptive to Prisoner of War (POW) internment and this must be so...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00204

    Original file (BC-2008-00204.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The available evidence of record does not support a finding that the service-connected medical conditions the applicant believes are combat-related were 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 opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03881

    Original file (BC-2007-03881.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of her request, she provided documentation associated with her CRSC application. She requested reconsideration after the VA granted her PTSD and Depression as a service connected disability. No additional documentation was provided to support a combat-related event as the direct cause for PTSD and Depression.