RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01511 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be entitled to benefits under the Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His neck injury which he incurred as a result of flying combat missions in Vietnam entitles him to benefits under CRSC. His civilian medical provider has found that his neck condition was connected to his flying duties during combat. In support of his appeal, he provides a personal statement; a letter from his civilian medical provider, unsigned, and additional documents. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant, a member of the Air Force Reserve, was transferred to the USAF Retired List, effective XX XXXX XXXX, at age 60. He was credited with 22 years, 4 months, and 25 days of satisfactory Federal service for retirement. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial stating, in part, that his condition does not meet the mandatory criteria for compensation under the CRSC program. The applicant submitted a CRSC claim for mitral valve prolapse, lumbar scoliosis, thoracic scoliosis, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), hypertension, blepharitis and pes planus. His claim was initially disapproved since he did not meet the minimum eligibility criteria and was not receiving disability compensation payments from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). The applicant was partially approved on 24 Aug 09 for PTSD, diabetes, tinnitus, hypertension and impaired hearing. He provided additional information and was subsequently approved for his remaining conditions, except for his neck. The applicant requested reconsideration of the Board's disapproval of compensation for his neck, but the request was denied 2 Jan 11. No evidence was provided to confirm this disability was the direct result of armed conflict, hazardous service, instrumentality of war, or simulating war. The applicant contends that he was hospitalized in Vietnam for a neck injury incurred while f1ying combat missions. DPSDC requested documents from the VA to justify approval of his request. Specifically, in September 2009 and again in May 2011, DPSDC requested in-service medical documents (from the time of the injury in 1972) reflecting a neck injury while flying. However, they were not able to obtain supporting documentation. By law, determinations of whether a disability is combat related will be based on the preponderance of available documentary information. All relevant documentary information is to be weighed in relation to known facts and circumstances, and determinations will be made on the basis of credible, objective documentary information in the records as distinguished from personal opinion, speculation, or conjecture. Additionally, in accordance with DD Form 2860, Claim for Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC), the fact that a member incurred a disability during a period of armed cont1ict or while participating in combat operations is not sufficient by itself to support a combat-related determination. There must be a definite, documented, causal relationship between the armed cont1ict and the resulting disability. For example, a medical document reflecting "Member strained his shoulder while flying today when he was slammed against the aircraft wall during a hard landing" shows a direct relationship to a combat-related event. However, as an example, an injury from a fall, simply from walking through the aircraft (not caused by turbulence, evasive maneuvers or a hard landing, but rather from a misstep) would not have a direct relationship to a combat-related event. There is no documentation confirming the applicant was injured during flight. The Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program, established by Public Law (PL) 107-314, provides compensation to certain retirees with combat-related disabilities. A retired member of the Uniformed Services must meet each of the four following conditions to meet the preliminary CRSC criteria: a. Has 20 or more years of active service in the Uniformed Services for the purpose of computing the amount of retired pay, or is entitled to retired pay under section 12731 of Title 10, United States Code, unless such retirement is under section 12731b of that same title or (the member is retired under Chapter 61 (disability retired). b. Is in retired status. c. Is entitled to retired pay, notwithstanding that such retired pay may be reduced due to receipt of Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) disability compensation. d. Has qualifying disability ratings (percentages) [retiree must be entitled to compensation for service-connected disabilities under 10 USC 38 by the DVA]. Qualifying Combat-Related Disability: Member has combat-related disabilities (which include any Purple Heart disabilities) that are compensated by the DVA. The complete AFPC/DPSDC evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant notes that DPSD has erroneously determined that his neck disability was not caused by combat or combat-related flight training. DPSD has impermissibly rewritten the governing statute to exclude flying training as a source for benefits under CRSC. He notes that DPSD indicated that he was partially approved for his conditions; however, his severe degeneration of his cervical spine remains denied. He has provided statements from a medical provider linking his cervical disk disease to an acute neck strain incurred while flying combat (missions?)in Vietnam in 1972, as well as many years of air combat training. The Board must conclude that the preponderance of medical evidence links his cervical disk disease to combat or combat-related flight training. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a letter from a medical provider, unsigned, including an amendment to his response. The 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, 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. While the applicant asserts that DPSD has erroneously determined that his neck injury was not caused by combat or combat-related flight training and impermissibly rewritten the law to exclude flying training, we are not lead to the same conclusion by the evidence of record. In this respect, DPSD notes that there must be a definite, documented, causal relationship between the armed conflict and the resulting disability; however, the evidence of record and that provided by the applicant fail to corroborate his claims. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2011-01511 in Executive Session on 24 October 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Apr 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSDC, dated 9 Jun 11, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Jul 11. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Aug 11, w/atchs.