RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02440
		INDEX CODE:  108.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He performed various duties within the security police career field.  In 1970 and 1971, security police were not allowed to wear any type of hearing protection, as it would interfere with his duties.  Ground crews would revive up aircraft engines in the revetment and although there were blast shields in the rear, the noise was deafening.  There are several studies that indicate the damaging effects the EB-66E had on hearing, which was conducted by the French, New Zealand and Australian Air Forces.  He further states there is no way to pinpoint his hearing loss just to one aircraft.

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 contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 14 January 1969.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of master sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 October 1988.  He served as a Law Enforcement Supervisor and Security Police Supervisor.  On 30 November 1989, he was relieved from active duty and retired from the Air Force on 1 December 2000, having served 20 years, 10 months and 17 days on active duty.

Available Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) records reflect a combined compensable rating of 40% for his unfitting conditions.

His CRSC application was partially approved on 20 April 2007.  The diagnosis of diabetes mellitus due to Agent Orange exposure was determined to be combat-related.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSD recommends denial.  DPSD states evidentiary requirements for granting CRSC for impaired hearing vary by career field.  Certain specialists, such as aircrew members and aircraft maintainers who are exposed to combat-related noise on a day-to-day basis, are required to show in-service hearing loss to be granted CRSC.  Other specialties that don’t have the routine, prolonged combat-related noise exposure, such as administrative, civil engineering, communications, and so forth, are required to show evidence of a combat-related acoustic trauma which caused the hearing condition in order for CRSC to be awarded.  Thus far they have received no evidence to confirm any combat-related acoustic trauma occurred.

Although applicant’s conditions have been deemed service-connected by the VA, their standard is to resolve doubt in the interest of the veteran and grant service connection for injuries or disease incurred while in-service.  Simply being assigned in a combat area, being in an exercise environment, or even performing hazardous service (flight crew, EOD, pararescue, etc.) does not automatically qualify an individual for CRSC.  We must look at what caused the injury or condition, activities taking place at the time, and resulting disability.  As such, many disabilities are ineligible for compensation under this program per the Department of Defense Program Guidance.  The impaired hearing and tinnitus do not meet the mandatory criteria for compensation under the CRSC program.

The DPSD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 12 October 2007, the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  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.  The available evidence of record does not support a finding that the service-connected medical conditions the applicant believes are combat-related were 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 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-2007-02440 in Executive Session on 28 April 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 July 2007, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 1 October 2007.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 October 2007.