RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-00884

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service connected disabilities of high blood pressure and 
coronary artery disease (CAD) be re-evaluated under the Combat 
Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program. 

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

1.  He has a disability that is presumed to have been caused by 
Agent Orange.  Further, the DVA admits that he may have been 
exposed to Agent Orange.  

2.  The DVA statement that their review of his records shows 
that he may have been exposed to Agent Orange during Vietnam 
amounts to a finding that it is as likely as not that his 
disability of CAD is due to Agent Orange.  Agent Orange is 
considered an instrumentality of war.  The AF argument that the 
reason for denial of his CRSC claim is that the coronary artery 
disease (CAD) is secondary to high blood pressure may be 
compliant with AF rules but is unfair given the preponderance of 
the evidence in the record.  He believes the AF made their 
decision based upon appropriate rules and regulations.  However, 
the strict application of those rules in this instance resulted 
in an unfair decision, given the evidence that shows he served 
in Thailand and Vietnam where Agent Orange was used.  

In support of his request, the applicant provided a personal 
statement, a copy of his DD Form 214, Report of Separation from 
Active Duty, dated 17 June 1975, DVA rating/decision letter, and 
supporting documents.  

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

________________________________________________________________


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to documents extracted from his military personnel 
record, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 31 May 1963 
and retired on 31 July 1983.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force at Exhibit C.  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

1.  AFPC/DPFDC recommends denial.  DPFDC states the applicant 
submitted a claim for CRSC for his hypertension, which was 
disapproved on 8 June 2010.  He submitted a claim for his 
coronary artery disease, and requested reconsideration of the 
Board's disapproval of compensation for his hypertension, but 
the request was denied on 17 May 2012, 9 July 2012, and 
11 February 2013.  The applicant has not provided evidence to 
confirm these disabilities were the direct result of armed 
conflict, hazardous service, instrumentality of war, or 
simulating war. ·

2.  The CRSC program was established to provide compensation to 
certain retirees, with combat-related disabilities, who qualify 
under established criteria.  If the veteran fails to satisfy the 
preliminary CRSC criteria, no further consideration by their 
service department is required and the claim will be denied 
accordingly.  If the veteran satisfies the preliminary CRSC 
criteria, the claim is reviewed for combat-related 
determination.  

3.  The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) awards service-
connected disabilities based on their standards.  They resolve 
doubt in the interest of the veteran and grant service 
connection for injuries or diseases incurred while in service.  
While service connection for disabilities is required for 
initial eligibility for CRSC consideration, CRSC criteria is 
more stringent.  CRSC guidance requires objective documentary 
evidence in order to support a combat-related determination.  
Military Departments will determine whether a disability is 
combat-related using the definitions and criteria set forth in 
DD Form 2860, Claim for Combat-Related Special Compensation 
(CRSC), Appendix A.  

4.  The applicant’s conditions do not meet the mandatory 
criteria for compensation under the CRSC program as outlined 
under the. provisions of Title 10 U.S.C., Section 1413a, and 
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense Guidance.  The 
applicant’s coronary artery disease was awarded by the DVA as 
secondary to his hypertension and documentation provided does 
not indicate a combat related event as the cause of his 
hypertension.  

The complete AFPC/DPFDC evaluation, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In further support of his appeal, the applicant states that he 
disagrees with the logic and recommendation of the Air Force.  
He reiterates his previous contentions and requests that the 
Board renders a finding of “boots on the ground in Vietnam” and 
approve his application for Combat-related Special Compensation 
based on his 30% disability rating for coronary artery disease.  

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.  

________________________________________________________________

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 applicant’s submission, to include his 
rebuttal comments, and the evidence of record, we do not find 
the applicant’s service-connected medical conditions were the 
direct result of an 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’s condition does not meet the 
mandatory criteria for compensation under the Combat Related 
Special Compensation program.  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 this application 
in Executive Session on 14 November 2013, under the provisions 
of AFI 36-2603:

			, Panel Chair
      			, Member
			, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR 
Docket number BC-2013-00884:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 February 2013, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPFDC, dated 26 April 2013, 
    w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 may 2013.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 16 May 2013.