RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02382
		INDEX CODE:  108.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  2 FEB 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected medical condition, condition of the skeletal system (left and right wrist), be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His carpal tunnel syndrome condition was incurred while typing onboard RC-135 aircraft, flying long missions, while performing combat related activities.  The typing was a necessary part of his job and not just day-to-day activity.  

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement and documentation associated with his CRSC application.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 17 Jul 79.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of technical sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Sep 93.  He served as an Aircrew Middle Eastern Cryptological Linguist.  He voluntarily retired from the Air Force on 31 Jul 99, having served 20 years and 14 days on active duty.

Available Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) records reflect a combined compensable rating of 30% for his unfitting conditions.  

His CRSC application was disapproved on 30 Jul 04 based upon the fact that his service-connected medical condition was determined not to be combat-related.  His request was approved for tinnitus rated at 10%.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states a review of his service and DVA medical records show his condition of the skeletal system (left and right wrist), is not combat related.  Some evidence of his condition was diagnosed as early as 1993.  Although an aircraft is an instrumentality of war, the keyboard equipment onboard is not considered an instrumentality of war.  Working on such equipment is not a inherent hazard associated with military flying, but is an industrial hazard.

The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant responded that prior to his assignment as an Airborne Cryptologic Linguist, physical examination did not indicate any muscular-skeletal difficulties.  He began his flying duties in 1992 and his condition was first noticed in 1993.  Over the following six years he flew over 250 sorties.  It is his contention that his condition was incurred while performing hazardous service on an instrumentality of war.  In his opinion, flights onboard a RC-135 aircraft do not fall under the day-to-day activities category.  Typical sorties lasted 8-14 hours, sometimes up to 24 hours.  During this time he was using a keyboard and several push button recorders to perform his duties.  The nature of this type work is non-stop from mission start until the flight ends.  

His 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 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 condition the applicant believes is combat-related was 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, 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 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-2004-02382 in Executive Session on 13 Oct 05, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Jul 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 18 Aug 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Aug 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Sep 04.