RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00826
		INDEX CODE:  108.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE
XXXXXXX
		HEARING DESIRED:  YES
XXXXXXX

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  13 Sep 05

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected disabilities of Left knee injury, hiatal hernia, loss of teeth, and arthritis, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His disabilities were incurred as a result of his duties as a gunner.  Specifically, his back problems are a direct result of flying long Strategic Air Command (SAC) Airborne Nuclear Alert missions during the Cold War years.  These missions lasted 24 to 26 hours in duration, with 10 - 12 hour training missions.  He also flew many 12- hour missions from Guam to Vietnam and back.  Because he did not have proper ear devices and was subjected to high decibel noise levels during pre-flight, in-flight slipstream noise, and the noise from one high frequency radio and two very high frequency radios.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 12 June 1950.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of chief master sergeant.  He served temporary duty (TDY) in Southeast Asia from 13 July 1965 to 17 July 1965, from September 1968 to March 1969, and from 3 January 1972 to 29 April 1972, as a B-52 gunner and fire control systems operator.  He voluntary retired from the Air Force on 1 July 1980, having served 30 years and 19 days on active duty.

Current Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) records reflect a combined compensable rating of 100 % for his unfitting conditions.  

His CRSC application was disapproved on 23 October 2003; however, on 23 April 2004, his impaired hearing was approved for 100% and spinal disc condition was approved for 20%.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial and states, in part, that applicant’s conditions do not meet the mandatory criteria for CRSC entitlement.  While his spinal disc condition and hearing loss have been approved for CRSC, his other conditions are not combat related. 

The AFPC/DPPD evaluation, with attachment, 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 July 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-2004-00826 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 11 Nov 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 24 Jun 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jul 04.