RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02963
		INDEX CODE:  108.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected medical conditions, limited motion in lumbar spine and limited motion in cervical spine, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was injured as a result of supporting training missions and the Vietnam War itself.  He was a Pneudraulic Mechanic for B-52s and KC-135s.  He went to Guam from August 1972 through February 1973 working on B-52s.  Exigencies in Guam required fast service and quick turnaround for airborne combat operations.  He injured his back because of the continuous heavy lifting working on the B-52s and KC-135s, which were instrumentalities of war.  

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, a copy of his DD Form 214, documentation associated with his CRSC application, a website printout, and documentation extracted from his medical records.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 13 Sep 71.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of master sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Jan 91.  He served as an Aircraft Pneudraulic Repairman and in 1974 he cross-trained and became a Maintenance Scheduler.  He voluntarily retired from the Air Force on 1 Oct 95.  He served 24 years and 18 days on active duty.

Current Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) records reflects a combined compensable disability rating of 70% percent for his unfitting conditions, which includes a rating of 60% for lumbar degenerative disc disease.

His CRSC application was disapproved on 28 Jul 03 and 19 Sep 03 because on the preponderance of evidence that his service-connected medical conditions were not determined to be combat-related.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states he was treated for back pain in August 1972 and in November 1973, during which it was determined he had Chronic Lumbar Sacral Sprain Syndrome.  He claimed his injury occurred while lifting heavy equipment and climbing on and off aircraft.  He was put of profile and recommendation was made that he cross train into a desk type job.  Injuries sustained by falling off or working on a military device where the injury was not caused by the device itself, but instead, error/misjudgment, are not considered to be combat related.  The injury occurred while doing his normal duties in lifting equipment and climbing up and down the aircraft.  There is no documentation that his condition is the direct result of armed conflict, hazardous service, or instrumentality of war, rather than normal wear and tear from other routine causes/exposure of his physical makeup after 20 years of military service.  The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states he was supporting the war directly and indirectly when he incurred his injury.  There was no error or misjudgment on his part.  He was following orders from his superiors and the Technical Order.  His back problems have continued since the initial acute injury as supported by his medical records.  He was changing a brake on a B-52 when he incurred his injury and has been receiving medical care ever since.  The B-52s he was working on were flying missions supporting the Vietnam War.  

In support of his response, applicant provided personal statements, documentation associated with his CRSC application, document extracted from his personnel records, and documentation extracted from his medical records.  His complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The medical consultant states in order to meet the instrumentality of war criteria, there must be a direct causal relationship between the instrumentality of war and the disability and such use or occurrence differs from the use or occurrence under similar circumstances in civilian pursuits.  Although his duties included performing maintenance work on instrumentalities of war, the occurrence of his reported back strain does not differ for those incurred under similar civilian pursuits.  Disabilities resulting from the performance of maintenance duties on instrumentalities of war are not considered eligible for CRSC.  Further, the subsequent development of degenerative disc disease over the several years following his duties as a pneudraulic mechanic was associated with the natural progression of degenerative disease of the spine and usual wear and tear of normal occupational and leisure activities.  His medical documentation finds no single reference to a single injury that alone could be considered severe enough to be the sole direct cause of his subsequent lumbar spine disease.  The Medical Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit F.

ODUSD(MPP)/Comp reviewed the applicant's request and concurs with the findings and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant.  The ODUSD evaluation is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reiterates, amongst other things, that his back injury occurred on the flightline at Carswell AFB, TX changing a brake on a B-52 aircraft supporting the Vietnam War and training missions.  His disc in his lower back is pressing against nerves and he has permanent nerve damage from his lower back down to his toes.  The Medical Consultant referred to one of his medical entries relating to his back pain but did not mention his many other entries.  His diagnosis of degenerative disc disease was not mentioned until 20 years after he incurred the injury.  The Medical Consultant makes mention of sports injuries.  His injuries to his right arm and foot, which required medical attention, were incurred while coaching flag football.  He did not participate in the basketball program while stationed at Eglin AFB, FL.  In an amended response, applicant states that the brakes on the B-52H models weigh 350 pounds.  His weight at the time was approximately 160 pounds.

In support of his response, applicant provided a personal statement and copies of previously submitted documentation.  His complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit I.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the available evidence of record, it is our opinion that the service-connected medical conditions the applicant believes are combat-related were not 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, do not qualify for compensation under the CRSC Act.  We agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2003-02963 in Executive Session on 6 Oct 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Sep 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 18 Dec 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jan 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 19 Jan 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 26 Jul 04.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, ODUSD(MPP)/Comp, not dated.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 2 Sep 04.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, Applicant, dated 6 Sep 04, w/atchs