RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01376
		INDEX CODE:  108.07

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  5 NOV 08

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His medical condition is a result from his performance of duty under conditions simulating war.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a personal statement and documentation associated with his CRSC application.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant having served 28 years, 4 months, and 20 days on active duty retired from the Air Force on 1 July 1975 in the grade of colonel.

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

His CRSC application was disapproved on 19 February 2004 based upon the fact that his service-connected medical condition was determined not to be combat-related.  He appealed the decision and on 10 May 2004 his appeal was denied.

On 28 June 2007, applicant’s CRSC application was partially approved for impaired hearing.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states although aircrew duties can be strenuous, conditions developed through the performance of normal service are not usually considered combat-related.  When considering chronic conditions it may be difficult to determine that armed conflict, hazardous service, instrumentality of war, or simulating war was the definitive cause.  To be eligible for compensation, clear documentation must be provided to indicate an injury occurred and was caused by a combat related factor (such as ejection from an aircraft) rather than from routine causes or the veteran’s particular physical make-up.  While the applicant’s condition meets the VA requirements for service-connected compensation, the evidence does not support additional compensation under CRSC.  This condition does not meet the mandatory criteria for compensation under the CRSC program.

The DPPD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the evaluation and states his disability may seem mild; however, it is not without its unannounced embarrassing moments.  They occur frequently enough to keep him concerned or anxious, especially when he is anywhere other than at home.  He believes he is deserving of the CRSC.  He has suffered and continues to suffer from a condition that was brought on while practicing a war maneuver.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, 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.  The available evidence of record does not support a finding that the service-connected medical condition the applicant believes is combat-related was 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 an error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2007-01376 in Executive Session on 2 November 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 April 2007, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 28 June 2007.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 July 2007.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 16 July 2007, w/atchs.