RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01661
		INDEX CODE:  108.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  25 Nov 05

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Documentation contained in his Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) records substantiate that his tinnitus and dermatophytosis are combat related.  

In support of his request, applicant provided documentation associated with his CRSC application.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant served as an enlisted member in the Regular Army from 6 Aug 41 through 23 Jun 42.  He was appointed a second lieutenant in the Regular Army on 24 Jun 42.  He served in the Air Reserves, the Reserve Air Corps and the Regular Air Force.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of colonel, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 15 Mar 62.  On 30 Apr 66, he voluntarily retired for years of service.  He served 23 years, 3 months, and 10 days on active duty

Available DVA records reflect a combined compensable rating of 100% for his unfitting conditions.  His CRSC application was disapproved on 6 Feb 04 based upon the fact that his service-connected medical conditions were determined not to be combat-related.  He was subsequently approved CRSC compensation for his impaired hearing, rated at 100%.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states a review of his service and DVA medical records show his tinnitus and dermatophytosis are not combat related.  In order for tinnitus to qualify for CRSC evidence must be present to show the condition manifested while in service.  There is no documentation of tinnitus during his service.  His records do not show, while in service, a combat-related event or events that were the direct cause of his dermatophytosis disability.  

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 1 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.  We note that the applicant is currently receiving CRSC compensation at the maximum rate of 100% and approval of CRSC for his tinnitus and dermatophytosis would not result in an increase in compensation.  However, in the event his impaired hearing were to improve resulting in a reduced DVA rating, his CRSC compensation would then be based on the ratings of other CRSC approved disabilities.  Unfortunately, after a thorough review of the available evidence of record, it is our opinion that the service-connected tinnitus and dermatophytosis 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.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2004-01661 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 18 May 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 23 Jun 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Jul 04.