RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03763
		INDEX CODE:  108.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected medical conditions, varicose veins, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) has determined that his venous insufficiency was caused by aerial flight, which is one of the criteria for Hazardous Service under CRSC program guidance.  His long aircrew missions aboard B-52, C-124, and C-141 aircraft contributed to his venous insufficiency.

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, documentation associated with denial of his request for CRSC benefits and flight certificates.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 28 Feb 55 and was discharged on 12 Jun 56 in order to accept a commission.  He was appointed a second lieutenant, Air Force Reserve, on 13 Jun 56.  He served as a pilot flying a variety of military aircraft.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of major, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 24 Jan 69.  He voluntarily retired from the Air Force on 1 Jul 77, in the grade of lieutenant colonel.  He served 20 years and 15 days on active duty.

His CRSC application was approved on 2 Sep 03.  He was awarded CRSC for malignant growth, residuals of cold injury, peripheral neuropathy, and stress incontinence of bowel.  His request for combat-related status for his venous insufficiency was denied.  His approval notification was amended to include bilateral hearing loss for a total CRSC disability of 80%.  

_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states there is no documentation in his records to show any problems with swelling of the legs or treatment for venous insufficiency.  He retired in June 1977 and his edema was not noted until October 1992 following knee surgery.  In July 2000, his private physician reports that it is his opinion that the venous insufficiency and edema problems are related to his prolonged sitting and confined quarters during his career as a pilot in the service.  The DVA granted the disability as service-connected due to reasonable doubt in favor of the veteran.  His records do not substantiate eligibility for CRSC.  The preponderance of evidence made available appears to show normal duties performed during the completion of his military responsibilities as a Pilot and Air Operations Officer.  Even though the DVA conceded his disability as service-connected, there is no clear connection between the incidence of his venous insufficiency and his flying duties, especially with over ten years between military duties and the beginning of his condition.  The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 13 Feb 04 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The Medical Consultant states the service medical record shows no evidence that he incurred chronic venous insufficiency while engaged in aerial flight.  Over ten years after retiring from the Air Force he was shown to have leg swelling due to chronic venous insufficiency.  Chronic venous insufficiency results from the loss of function of the valves in the leg veins that prevent the back flow of blood.  Work posture and occupation are among the most controversial pre-disposing factors associated with venous disease.  Medical literature shows studies indicating that prolonged standing, not prolonged sitting is associated with chronic venous insufficiency.  Prolonged sitting in aircraft is associated with an increased risk of developing blood clots in the veins of the legs, typically in individuals with other risk factors.  The preponderance of evidence does not support a conclusion that he incurred his chronic venous insufficiency while performing aerial flight, nor that the condition is a direct result of those duties.  The Medical Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit E.

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 F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the additional Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 30 Jul 04 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 condition the applicant believes is combat-related was 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, does 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-2003-03763 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 4 Nov 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 4 Feb 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Feb 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 1 Mar 04.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, ODUSD(MPP)/Comp, dated 21 Jul 04.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 30 Jul 04.