RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04341 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service connected disability be re-evaluated under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His hearing loss, although marginal at the time, did not appear to affect the performance of his duties. The follow up exams were never adequately completed; even after they were requested by medical personnel and this condition was exacerbated due to continued hazardous duties. Regardless of the time that has passed, the government should be responsible for their actions or inactions. In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty, NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, and other supporting documentation. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant retired from the Air National Guard effective 1 October 1993 in the grade of staff sergeant/E5. A Department of Veterans Affairs Rating decision dated 25 January 2010 listed the applicant’s hearing loss as a service connected disability with an overall combined disability rating of 10 percent. The applicant requested and was denied CRSC by AFPC/DPSD on 10 December 2010. He requested reconsideration which was also disapproved. AFPC/DPSD explained that service connection from the DVA does not automatically qualify a disability as combat related under the CRSC program on 19 July 2011. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The evidence clearly reveals the applicant had decreased hearing in his left ear in 1957 and 1958. Currently, when hearing tests are repeated secondary to a screening for potential hearing loss, they are conducted after a noise free interval to determine if the hearing loss is transient or not. Additionally, in military and civilian occupations, hearing protection programs offer high level of both awareness and scrutiny of work environments which have a high potential to induce hearing loss; these programs did not exist years ago. Regardless of the change in the standard of care, the applicant is correct in his conclusion that there is clear documentation of high frequency hearing loss (HFHL), and documentation of his employment in a high noise area, without documentation of the follow-up which had been recommended. However, the available records and the applicant’s own statements identify that his marginal HFHL at the time neither affected his work performance nor his fitness for duty. The DVA has concluded that his hearing loss is service connected and rated him accordingly. As the document suggests, his early HFHL did not affect his fitness for duty, accordingly, there is no basis for medical retirement, or for compensation specifically from the Air Force for this condition. His request for CRSC was addressed by AFPC/DPSD. In accordance with DoDI 1332.38, the purpose of determining if the injury or illness is combat related pertains to the applicability of one’s disability compensation be exempt from federal taxes. As there is no compensation from the physical disability system due in this case, there was no condition found which rendered the individual unfit for duty, then Combat Related Special Compensation does not apply. The applicant has not met the burden of proof that warrants the desired change of record. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant clarified that he is requesting CRSC. He also states that he performed duties on the flight line during mass take-offs and landings. These were conducted under simulated war time conditions for training and practice. The applicant’s complete response 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. The applicant has requested that his service medical records be re-evaluated under the CRSC program. However, we do not find the applicant’s service-connected medical condition is 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. As such, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant’s condition, while rated service-connected by the DVA, was not unfitting for service and therefore, does not meet the mandatory criteria for compensation under the CRSC program. 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 issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ 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-2011-04341 in Executive Session on 13 November 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04341 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Oct 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 28 Jun 12. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 25 Jul 12. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, undated.