RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00214
		INDEX CODE:  108.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE
XXXXXXX
		HEARING DESIRED:  YES
XXXXXXX

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  26 Jul 05

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected disabilities, Loss of Part of Skull, Spinal Disc Condition, and Caisson Disease of the Bones, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While responding to an Operational Readiness Inspection (ORI) Alert, he had a brain aneurysm.  Since the disability was incurred in the performance of duty under conditions simulating war, it should meet the criteria for CRSC entitlement.

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 19 September 1957.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of technical sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Jul 1969.  He served in Southeast Asia from 11 May 1969 to 8 May 1970 as a Mobile Flight Line Monitor.  He voluntarily retired from the Air Force on 1 October 1977, having served 20 years and 12 days on active duty.

Current Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) records reflect a combined compensable rating of 60% for his unfitting conditions.  

His CRSC application was disapproved on 12 December 2003, because he did not provide any documentation to support that his conditions were the direct result of performance of duty under conditions simulating war.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial and states, in part, that applicant’s conditions do not meet the mandatory criteria for CRSC entitlement.  The fact a member incurred a medical condition during a combat operation/training exercise is not sufficient evidence to support a combat-related determination.  There is no record of any particular incident that could account for the onset of the aneurysm.  In addition, applicant states the spinal disc condition and caisson disease of bones developed during treatment following the aneurysm.

The AFPC/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 21 June 2004 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 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 opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its 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-2004-00214 in Executive Session on 6 April 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Jan 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 17 Jun 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jun 04.

                                                                      Chair