RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           15 September 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20050002122


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti            |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. John N. Slone                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Eric N. Andersen              |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carol A. Kornhoff             |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that his Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
rated disabilities for limited motion of forearm and limited motion of
ankle be approved for Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC).

2.  The applicant states that he incurred these injuries during Basic
Combat Training (BCT).  As such, they were incurred while simulating war,
one of the criteria for award of CRSC.

3.  The applicant continues that he does not have the medical records to
support his contention, but has the advisory opinion that was provided to
this Board when he requested incapacitation pay for his injuries.  He asks
that the Board accept the facts as presented in that advisory opinion.

4.  The applicant provides the denial of his CRSC application and the
aforementioned advisory opinion, dated 15 August 1990.  In the advisory
opinion it was stated that the applicant, then a lieutenant colonel
assigned to a troop program unit as a Reservist, was ordered to 93 days of
active duty for training.  The advisory opinion’s only reference to the
cause of the applicant’s injuries was that the applicant “injured his ankle
during ADT [Active Duty for Training] on 17 July 1986.  The injury was
considered to have been incurred in line of duty.”

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC), as established by Section
1413a, Title 10, United States Code, as amended, states that eligible
members are those retirees who have 20 years of service for retired pay
computation (or 20 years of service creditable for reserve retirement at
age 60) and who have disabilities that are the direct result of armed
conflict, specially hazardous military duty, training exercises that
simulate war, or caused by an instrumentality of war.  Such disabilities
must be compensated by the VA and rated at least 10% disabling.  For
periods before 1 January 2004 (the date this statute was amended), members
had to have disabilities for which they have been awarded the Purple Heart
and are rated at least 10% disabled or who are rated at least 60% disabled
as a direct result of armed conflict, specially hazardous duty, training
exercises that simulate war, or caused by an instrumentality of war.  CRSC
benefits are equal to the amount of VA disability compensation offset from
retired pay based on those disabilities determined to be combat-related.

2.  On 27 January 2005, the U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA)
CRSC Branch determined that the applicant’s limited motion of forearm and
limited motion of ankle were not combat related.

3.  In the processing of similar cases, advisory opinions were obtained
from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (OUSD), Military
Personnel Policy.  The OUSD has maintained in these opinions that in order
for a condition to be considered combat related, there must be evidence of
the condition having a direct, causal relationship to war or the simulation
of war.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The CRSC criteria is specifically for those military retirees who have
combat related disabilities.  Incurring a disability while in a theater of
operations or on a training exercise is not, in and of itself, sufficient
to grant a military retiree CRSC.  The military retiree must show that the
disability was incurred while engaged in combat, while performing duties
simulating combat conditions, or while performing specially hazardous
duties such as parachuting or scuba diving.

2.  The applicant has not submitted any evidence to substantiate that his
disabilities were a result of an accident incurred while he was assigned to
a unit conducting BCT.  The advisory opinion only stated that he was
performing ADT at the time of his injury.  However, even if he had
substantiated that he was assigned to a unit conducting BCT, he obviously
was not being trained since he was a lieutenant colonel at that time.  As
such, the applicant has not submitted sufficient evidence to show that his
disabilities have a direct, causal relationship to the simulation of war.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____cak_  ___ena__  ____jns__  DENY APPLICATION





BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.





            __________John N. Slone__________
                    CHAIRPERSON


                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050002122                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050915                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |



-----------------------
[pic]