RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00920
		INDEX CODE:  108.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was seen ten times for his prostate gland condition.  His records have been misplaced between the Air Force and the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).

In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his CRSC denial letter and documents extracted from his medical records.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant served in the Army from 11 Jan 55 through 11 Feb 57.  He contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 12 Feb 57.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of technical sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Oct 68.  He served as an Aircraft Maintenance Technician.  He voluntary retired from the Air Force on 31 May 75, having served 20 years and 18 days on active duty.

Current DVA records reflect a combined compensable rating of 80% for his unfitting conditions.  

His CRSC application was disapproved on 11 Feb 04 based upon the fact that insufficient documentation was provided to show his service-connected medical conditions were combat-related.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states review of his service and DVA medical records does not substantiate the approval of his request.  The fact that he had a history of prostates is not sufficient to support a combat related determination.  He claims his condition was incurred by exposure to Agent Orange.  For this to be so the DVA must specifically grant the disability as presumptive to Agent Orange.  His disabilities are not considered to be presumptive of Agent Orange.  

The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

During his tour in Vietnam from October 1969 through October 1970 he was located in an area where Agent Orange was used.  Approximately six months thereafter, he developed a prostate gland condition.  He was never told what caused this and since his retirement in 1975 he was placed on disability for the condition.  Applicant believes that he qualifies for CRSC because his condition developed while in a combat area.  

His complete response, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 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.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2004-00920 in Executive Session on 6 Apr 05, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, not dated, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 3 Jun 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jun 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 22 Nov 04.