Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01779
Original file (BC-2011-01779.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01779 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His military record be corrected to reflect the combat related 
injuries he incurred while performing duties in Vietnam. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His Vietnam venture began in 1970 on the borders of Cambodia. 
The mission lasted about 60 days. At least five fellow soldiers 
were killed and others lost limbs. They walked for miles and 
often through water that was waist high. They were dirty and 
subjected to skin rashes and insect bites. Many of his fellow 
soldiers were killed: one was decapitated trying to jump from a 
helicopter, others were killed during fights and building 
bunkers. 

 

He was very excited about serving his country but feels he 
should be compensated for his physical and mental disabilities. 
He is applying for combat related special compensation (CRSC) 
and needs this as evidence to support his claim. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal 
statement and copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release 
of Discharge from Active Duty. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant retired on 1 January 2005 in the grade of master 
sergeant (E-7). 

 

A DVA Rating decision, dated 21 June 2007, indicates the 
applicant’s conditions of bursitis for his right elbow, bleeding 
ulcer, rash in groin, bursitis left elbow and tuberculosis were 
not service connected. He was awarded a temporary evaluation of 
100 percent for his hospitalization for post traumatic stress 


disorder (PTSD) effective 12 December 2006. An evaluation of 
30 percent was assigned as of 1 February 2007. 

 

The applicant applied for CRSC and on 26 March 2010, his request 
was denied. HQ AFPC/DPSD found there was no indication of a 
combat related stressor. The applicant requested 
reconsideration and on 5 October 2010 and 24 March 2011, his 
requests were denied. While it was found his PTSD was related 
to his time on active duty, DPSD explained that PTSD does not 
automatically qualify his disability as combat related. They 
also informed the applicant that their standards were much more 
rigorous when determining disabilities under current criteria. 
They also found the applicant submitted no new information to 
substantiate his request for the CRSC. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial. The CRSC program was established 
to provide compensation to certain retirees with combat-related 
disabilities under Title 10 U.S.C, Section 1413a. If the 
veteran does not satisfy the preliminary CRSC criteria, no 
further consideration is required and the claim is denied. 

 

The VA awards service connected disabilities based on their 
standards. While service connected disability is required for 
initial legibility 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. 

 

The applicant’s condition does not meet the mandatory criteria 
for compensation under the CRSC program. There is no 
documentation confirming his exposure to hostile fire. 

 

The complete DPSDC 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 10 November 2011, for review and comment within 
30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not 
received a 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. The applicant 
has requested that his service medical records be amended to 
reflect that he incurred injuries while performing official 
duties in Vietnam. It appears the applicant is seeking to have 
his medical records confirm that his service-connected PTSD 
qualifies for benefits under the CRSC Act. However, we do not 
find the evidence submitted is sufficient to conclude 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. As such, 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. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to 
the contrary, we find no 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-2011-01779 in Executive Session on 5 March 2012, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

 

 


The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number 
BC-2011-01779 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Apr 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSDC, dated 2 Nov 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Nov 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 

 

 

 

 

 






Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01511

    Original file (BC-2011-01511.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his appeal, he provides a personal statement; a letter from his civilian medical provider, unsigned, and additional documents. Specifically, in September 2009 and again in May 2011, DPSDC requested in-service medical documents (from the time of the injury in 1972) reflecting a neck injury while flying. The complete AFPC/DPSDC evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00492

    Original file (BC-2012-00492.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He should be granted compensation under the CRSC program for his service-connected disability of PTSD. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial of the applicant’s request that his PTSD be approved for CRSC. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice;...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00461

    Original file (BC-2012-00461.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was never informed that he would lose his entitlements to CRSC and CRDP because he retired prior to reaching 20 years of active duty service. On 1 Dec 04, the DVA awarded him a compensable disability rating of 10 percent for General Anxiety Disorder. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial of the applicant’s request that his anxiety disorder be approved for CRSC.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02090

    Original file (BC-2011-02090.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    While service connected disability is required for initial legibility 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. Based on the documentation submitted with this application, insufficient documentation has been provided to make a combat related determination. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Jul 11.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01293

    Original file (BC-2011-01293.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03157

    Original file (BC-2010-03157.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03157 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical conditions, hearing loss and tinnitus be assessed as combat-related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00611

    Original file (BC-2010-00611.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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). When making combat-related determinations the Board looks for documentation from the time of the injury confirming the event and the injury. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00337

    Original file (BC-2010-00337.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00337 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of United States Air Force (USAF) Physical Evaluation Board, dated 31 Jan 06, be changed to reflect his injuries were a direct result of enemy action , and that he be awarded benefits...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-04036

    Original file (BC-2007-04036.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-04036 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected disability of Left and Right Shoulder Bursitis be reevaluated as combat-related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act. We agree with the opinion and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00241

    Original file (BC-2011-00241.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He provided additional information and was subsequently disapproved twice. While the applicant’s condition meets the VA requirements for service connected compensation, the evidence does not support additional compensation under CRSC. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement and extracts from his master personnel record.