RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03094
		INDEX CODE:  108.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected medical condition, lumbar spine syndrome, post-operative discectomy and laminectomy L4 through S1, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

On 10 Oct 96, during a 10-hour flight-training mission, which logged 42 assault landings, he began experiencing intense pain in his back and down his left leg after one of the assault landings.  Assault landings are considered simulated combat training and clearly fall under the category of injuries incurred in the performance of duty under conditions simulating war.   Up until that date, he never had any back problems.

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, documentation associated with his initial CRSC application, documentation extracted from his medical records, and separation documents.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 14 Sep 78.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of technical sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Dec 90.  He served as a Jet Engine mechanic, a Structural Specialist, and as a Flight Engineer. On 30 Sep 98, he voluntarily retired for years of service.  He served 20 years and 17 days on active duty

His CRSC application was disapproved on 31 Jul 03 based upon the fact that his service-connected medical condition was determined not to be combat-related or the direct result of duty performed under conditions simulating war.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states he was treated for a muscle spasm in October 1996 and put on quarters for 48 hours.  His injury occurred as he bent over to install a gear pin under the wheel well of the aircraft.  In April 1997, he underwent Laminectomy and Discectomy of his last two discs in the lumbar area.  He was removed from flying duties in October 1997.  The fact that he incurred a disability during an exercise is not sufficient to support a combat-related determination.  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 eligible for CRSC. In this case the injury occurred while bending to install a gear pin.  Other than his statement, there is no documentation that his condition is the result of other than routine causes/exposures of his particular physical makeup after 18 years of military service.  

The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reiterates that he has a disability rated at 60% and his injury was incurred during the performance of operational related duty as required to be eligible for CRSC.  Applicant provides an account of the mission in which he states his injury was incurred and states that after the ninth hour of the training mission the aircraft experienced a hard landing and he began experiencing a sharp pain in his lower back and leg.  He figured the pain was due to fatigue and went on to complete the last hour of the mission.  At the completion of the mission he went outside the aircraft to complete his post-flight duties.  Upon entering the wheel well for pin installation he felt a pop in his lower back.  Treatment after the injury resulted in surgery six months after the injury.  The six-month delay added to the permanent nerve damage in his back.  If his condition was normal wear and tear as suggested by DPPD then it stands to reason that prior to that day in question he would have been treated for some type of back problem.  By stating that his injury was the result of poor decision making, DPPD is trying to shift the blame to him.  He was required by regulation to enter the nose wheel well area and any way you look at it, the injury occurred while he was on or attached to the aircraft.  

In support of his response, applicant provided a personal statement and a copy of his quarters authorization slip.  His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The Medical Consultant states he developed symptoms of a herniated disc following a training flight in October 1996.  He contend his herniated discs were due to the 42 assault landings performed during the training flight; however, the preponderance of the medical evidence indicates the inciting event was picking up and installing a landing gear pin following the completion of a training flight.  A completely normal lumbar spine does not herniate intervertebral discs as a result of C-130 landings, including assault landings.  Although assault landings may aggravate pre-existing intervertebral disc disease on an occupational basis, the contribution is not the sole or direct cause.  

The Medical Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states in accordance with Air Force regulations, aircrew duty time begins 2 hours and 15 minutes prior to flight and ends when all flight checklists have been completed.  Pre and post-flight duties are considered flight duties.  Therefore, if his injury had been incurred installing the pin then it should be considered during the performance of flight duties.  Applicant reiterates that he initially injured his back while accomplishing 42 assault landings.  His initial medical diagnosis, made without x-rays and an MRI, was a muscle spasm.  The herniated disc was not discovered until after the x-ray and MRI were performed.  The flight surgeon in his report one month later indicated that he initially injured his back during flight.  The installation of the gear pin did not create his problem, it merely identified it.  With regard to his claims for compensation due to Agent Orange and PTSD, applicant states that his claim was denied by the DVA; however his DVA claim is currently pending appeal.  

His complete submission, 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.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2003-03094 in Executive Session on 14 Dec 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Sep 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 17 Dec 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jan 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 15 Jan 04, w/atch.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 9 Jul 04.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 22 Sep 04.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 19 Oct 04.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.