RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00768
		INDEX CODE:  108.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE
							HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  11 SEP 05

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected medical conditions, spinal disc condition, limited motion of wrist and tinnitus, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was either in a combat zone or preparing to enter one most of his 22-year career.  His spine was injured during an emergency landing in Korea.  He walked away from the landing but his spine was injured.  In Bermuda, he was making an emergency landing and again walked away but his back was injured.  In the 1960's while serving as a KC-135 pilot, he volunteered for fighter jet duty but was told by a flight surgeon that he recommended that he nurse his injured spine until retirement.  He took his advice and flew KC-135s until retirement.  After retirement he received Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) disability for his spine injury.  During the era of 1940 through 1965 pilots were very reluctant to take anything to a flight surgeon.  It was not very macho and if they did not fly, they did not get paid.  Accident or incident reports were not usually accomplished.  

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, and documents associated with his CRSC application.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

After serving as an enlisted member of the Air National Guard, applicant was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve of the Air Force and was voluntarily ordered to extended active duty on 23 Oct 52.  He served as a pilot flying the F-86, T-6, C-47, KC-97, and KC-135 aircraft.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Jun 70.  On 31 May 72, he voluntarily retired for years of service.  He served 21 years, 8 months, and 11 days on active duty.

His CRSC application was disapproved on 17 Dec 03 based upon the fact that his service-connected medical condition was determined not to be combat-related.  Subsequent to the BCMR Medical Consultant's recommendation, his CRSC application was approved for tinnitus, rated at 10%

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states a review of his service and DVA medical records show his spinal disc condition and limited motion of wrist, are not combat related.  His records do not show, while in service, a combat-related event or events that were the direct cause of his disabilities.  

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 9 Jul 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 there is no evidence the applicant's ganglion cyst is related to or was caused by aerial flight and does not qualify for CRSC.  He has degenerative joint and disc disease of the lumbar and cervical spines.  The cause of the disease is multi-factorial with a strong genetic basis and association with aging.  Changes in cartilage and bone structure with aging have been identified as involved in the development of the disease.  The progression of degenerative spine disease may also be related to cumulative wear and tear from repetitive micro-traumas related to occupational, recreational, postural, and normal daily activities.  

Aerial flight is an episodic occurrence during the course of aircrew duty and does not account for all the wear and tear on the spine, since for most, the majority of the working time is actually spent on the ground.  Traumatic spine injury such as that incurred in ejections form aircraft, or aircraft crashes can result in subsequent degenerative spine disease localized to the area of injury from altered biomechanics due to significant structural alterations.  Such an injury would be expected to have resulted in the need to promptly seek medical attention, require a period of recovery and prolonged removal from flying duties.  In the absence of a specific traumatic event resulting in significant, documented spine injury, it is impossible to attribute direct causation of degenerative spine disease to aerial flight.  According to CRSC criteria, a finding that a disability is the direct result of hazardous service requires that the disability be the direct result of actions taken in the performance of such service.  There is no evidence in his medical records that indicate there was any injury or strain during hazardous service that may have caused or contributed to his back condition.  Entries indicate spontaneous pain or pain associated with long distance driving or sports activities.  

The Medical Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 11 Apr 05 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 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-2004-00768 in Executive Session on 1 Jun 05, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Mar 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 22 Jun 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jul 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 8 Apr 05.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 11 Apr 05.

                                   

AFBCMR

USAF, Retired

Dear XXXXX,
	Reference your application submitted under the provisions of AFI 36-2603 (Section 1552, 10 USC), AFBCMR BC-2004-00768.

	After careful consideration of your application and military records, the Board determined that the evidence you presented did not demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  Accordingly, the Board denied your application.

	You have the right to submit newly discovered relevant evidence for consideration by the Board.  In the absence of such additional evidence, a further review of your application is not possible.

	BY DIRECTION OF THE CHAIR

Attachment:
Record of Board Proceedings