RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00611
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His service-connected medical conditions, arthritis lumbar spine,
right hand, degenerative arthritis - left knee, bursitis - right
shoulder, frostbite - left foot three toes, and right heel spur
be assessed as combat-related in order to qualify for
compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC)
Act.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He received several wounds in Korea. He received shrapnel in his
right hand, frostbite to three toes on his left foot and wounds
and injuries from an incoming explosion (back, knee, and right
shoulder).
In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal
statement and documentation associated with his CRSC application.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant with 22 years, 11 months and 5 days of active
service retired from the Air Force on 1 October 1981. He served
as a Recruiter, Aircraft Loadmaster Technician, Transportation
Supervisor, and a Passenger and Household Goods Specialist.
His CRSC application was approved on 31 March 2004 for PTSD, on
6 May 2004 for impaired hearing and tinnitus on 10 May 2010.
However, his appeal was disapproved for his back, neck, right
shoulder, left knee, frostbite of three toes on the left foot,
and right heel spur based upon the fact that his service-
connected medical conditions were determined not to be combat-
related.
Available Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) records reflect a
combined compensable rating of 100% for his unfitting conditions.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial. DPSDC states by law,
determinations of whether a disability is combat-related will be
based on the preponderance of available documentary information.
All relevant documentary information is to be weighed in relation
to known facts and circumstances, and determinations will be made
on the basis of credible, objective documentary information in
the records as distinguished from personal opinion, speculation,
or conjecture. When making combat-related determinations the
Board looks for documentation from the time of the injury
confirming the event and the injury.
Documentation provided does not confirm injuries from incoming
artillery knocking the applicant down a hill, a hard aircraft
landing, or boarding a landing craft in high seas. Additionally,
injuries incurred from sports activities are not approvable for
CRSC. His claim and documentation contained no definitive
evidence to confirm these disabilities were the direct result of
a combat-related event.
The DPSDC complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 27 August 2010, 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 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.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
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 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-2010-00611 in Executive Session on 15 November 2010,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-00611 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 February 2010.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSDC, dated 29 June 2010, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 August 2010.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00611 ADDENDUM
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants appeal and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings, with attachments, at Exhibit E. The applicant submitted a letter dated 28 April 2011, requesting reconsideration. The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: In an earlier finding, the Board determined...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019571
The artillery rounds were over 100 pounds each and had to be carried on the shoulder during firing missions. During firing, he was exposed to loud noises and he inhaled smoke that hurt the lungs and caused severe coughing because of the fumes. Without conclusive evidence to establish a direct, causal relationship of the applicant's conditions of bronchial asthma, right and left elbow strain, right and left carpel tunnel syndrome, thoracolumbar spine strain with spondylosis, and right and...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03694
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03694 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service connected disability be re-evaluated under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-01081
His service-connected medical condition, arthritis of the back and neck and sinusitis (bronchitis) be reevaluated as combat-related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibits C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02290
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02290 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 Jan 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical conditions, injury to right toe, heel, and knee condition, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01299
In support of his request, the applicant provided a personal statement and documentation associated with his CRSC application. While the applicant’s conditions meet the VA requirements for service- connected compensation, the evidence does not support additional compensation under CRSC. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice;...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2006-03331
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03331 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be entitled to benefits under the Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program for his medical conditions associated with his foot, knee, shoulder, neck, ribs, and wrists. Compensation ratings Special (CRSC) d. Has qualifying disability The...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03866
On 25 Sep 08, the applicant concurred with the recommendation. The complete DPSDC evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states his medical/treatment records clearly verify zero signs of asthma pre-deployment and confirm diagnosis post-deployment. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01293
The CRSC program is designed to provide compensation for combat- related injuries. 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, does not qualify for compensation under the CRSC Act. ...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00537
The Informal PEBadjudicated “chronic pain, both heels, due to bone spurs and Achilles tendonitis”as unfitting, rated at 10%,citing criteria of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy.The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The PEB rated the bilateral Achilles tendonitis, heel spurs, and chronic heel painat 10% (Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities [VASRD] code 5003; degenerative arthritis) citing slight/frequent pain IAW USAPDA pain policy. The...