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. 1 2