RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01725
		INDEX CODE:  108.07
		COUNSEL: XXXX
		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  1 Dec 05
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His injuries were incurred in Korea in 1952 under combat conditions. 

His complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 7 Dec 50.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of technical sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Jun 66.  He served as a Flight Engineer.  He voluntary retired from the Air Force on 31 Dec 70, having served 20 years and 24 days on active duty.

Current Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) records reflect a combined compensable rating of 90% for his unfitting conditions.  

His CRSC application was approved for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder but his knee prosthesis and ankle injury were disapproved based upon the fact that those medical conditions were determined not to be combat-related.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states a review of his service and DVA medical records and personnel files show his knee prosthesis and ankle injury are not combat related.  He stated in his original application that both injuries occurred when he was running under fire and jumping into a foxhole.  His records show he twisted his ankle on 6 Aug 51 while jumping across a ditch.  The DVA has not rated him for his ankle injury.  Claims not rated by the DVA cannot be approved for CRSC.  His records show a puncture for aspiration of joint, right knee; however, the same records are silent for any specific cause of the injury.  His records do not show, while in service, a combat-related event or events that were the direct cause of his knee 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 and to his counsel on 28 Jun 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.  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-2004-01725 in Executive Session on 11 Jul 05, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 May 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 24 Jun 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jun 04.