IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016702 BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___x____ ____x___ ____x___ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016702 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 to amend the decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records as set forth in Docket Number AR20150002978, dated 17 September 2015. _____________x_____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016702 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests reconsideration of the previous Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) decision as promulgated in Docket Number AR20150002978 on 17 September 2015. Specifically, he requests correction of his records to show the right shoulder injury he sustained in 1991 is a combat-related injury. 2. The applicant states a recommendation for award from his company commander shows he provided leadership and technical expertise to a mission near Logistics Base Echo, involving equipment issued to the 3rd Armored Calvary Regiment. He is also providing new medical evidence. 3. The applicant provides: * DA Form 4980-14 (Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) Certificate), dated 27 July 1991 * DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated 22 July 1991 * a medical report from The Radiology Clinic, LLC, Tuscaloosa, AL, dated 30 July 2015 * a medical report form the Tuscaloosa Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC), dated 11 August 2015 * Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings in Docket Number AR20150002978, dated 17 September 2015 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records that were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20150002978 on 17 September 2015. 2. The documents provided by the applicant were not reviewed during the adjudication of his previous request. Therefore, these documents are considered new evidence that warrants consideration by the Board. 3. In the previous Record of Proceedings, the Board noted the following: a. The applicant's service medical records are not available for review. b. He enlisted in the Alabama Army National Guard on 18 October 1983. He completed his initial active duty training and was awarded military occupational specialty 55B (Ammunition Specialist). c. He entered active duty in support of Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm on 21 November 1990 and served on active duty until 31 August 1991. d. He provided medical documents as follows: (1) The back page of an SF 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care), dated 22 April 1991, which shows he had right shoulder pain since March; it had started with lifting. (2) A DD Form 689 (Individual Sick Slip), dated 8 July 1991, which directed no overhead work for 10 days due to a problem with his right arm. (3) A SF 513 (Consultation Sheet), dated 31 July 1991, which shows he was treated for pain in the right shoulder. The tentative diagnosis was bursitis. (4) A DA Form 2173 (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status), which shows he injured his right shoulder (on or around 8 March 1991) while loading equipment into tracked vehicles at Port Dammam. He did not report to sick call immediately because he thought the pain would go away. 4. The Board denied the applicant's request because his right shoulder injury appears to have been incurred in the line of duty when he was loading equipment onto a vehicle. There is no evidence that it was incurred as a result of armed conflict, hazardous service, under conditions simulating war, or through an instrumentality of war. 5. In support of his for reconsideration, the applicant provided: a. An ARCOM Certificate and a DA Form 638 that show he was awarded the ARCOM for service during the period 18 January to 20 June 1991. These documents do not show he was injured while conducting combat operations. b. A medical report from The Radiology Clinic, LLC, Tuscaloosa, AL, dated 30 July 2015, which shows he was examined for right shoulder pain. This document does not show he was injured while conducting combat operations. c. A medical report form the Tuscaloosa VAMC, dated 11 August 2015, which shows he has a clinical history of right shoulder pain. This document does not show he was injured while conducting combat operations. REFERENCES: The U.S. Army Human Resources Command website defines combat-related injuries as having been incurred as a direct result of armed conflict; as a result of hazardous service; incurred in the performance of duty under conditions simulating war; or through an instrumentality of war. It states: a. The fact a member incurred the disability during a period of war or an area of armed conflict or while participating in combat operations is not sufficient by itself to support a combat-related determination. There must be clear evidence of a definite, documented, causal relationship between the armed conflict and the resulting disability. Armed conflict includes a war, expedition, occupation of an area or territory, battle, skirmish, raid, invasion, rebellion, insurrection, guerrilla action, riot or any other action in which service members are engaged with a hostile or belligerent nation, faction, force or terrorists. b. Hazardous service includes those activities such as flight, diving and parachuting duty and are those where the disability was incurred during performance of duties that present a higher degree of danger to service personnel due to the level of exposure to actual or simulated armed conflict. The fact a member incurred the disability during a period of hazardous service is not sufficient by itself to support a combat-related determination. There must be clear evidence of a definite, documented, causal relationship between the hazardous service and the resulting disability. Such service includes, but is not limited to aerial flight, parachute duty, demolition duty, experimental stress duty, diving duty and rescue missions. c. An instrumentality of war is a vehicle, vessel or device designed primarily for military service and intended for use in such service at the time of the occurrence or injury. Incurrence during an actual period of war is not required; however, there must be a direct, documented, causal relationship between the instrumentality of war and the resulting disability. The disability must be incurred incident to a hazard or risk of service and be caused by the device itself. Instrumentalities not designed primarily for military service are included if use of, or occurrence involving, such instrumentality subjects the individual to a hazard peculiar to military service. d. The fact a member incurred the disability during a period of simulating war or in an area of simulated armed conflict or while participating in simulated combat operations is not sufficient by itself to support a combat-related determination. There must be clear evidence of a definite, documented, causal relationship between the simulated armed conflict and the resulting disability. In general, this covers disabilities resulting from simulated combat activity during military training, such as war games, practice alerts, tactical exercises, airborne operations, grenade and live fire weapons practice, bayonet training, hand-to-hand combat training, rappelling and negotiating a combat confidence and obstacle course. Physical training activities such as calisthenics and jogging or formation running and supervised sports activities are not included. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends that a right shoulder injury he sustained in March 1991 (after Operation Desert Storm had ended) should be considered a combat-related injury. 2. As concluded in the previous Record of Proceedings, his right shoulder injury appears to have been incurred in the line of duty when he was loading equipment onto a vehicle. There is no evidence that it was incurred as a result of armed conflict, hazardous service, under conditions simulating war, or through an instrumentality of war. 3. The new evidence provided was carefully considered; however, these documents only show a history of shoulder pain. These documents fail to show that his injury was sustained as a result of armed conflict or hazardous service. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150016702 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150016702 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2