RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01170 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical condition, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) be reevaluated as combat-related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The evidence of a near death experience for him, his crew and the death of 3 people was ignored by the CRSC Board. The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) psychiatrist rendered that his PTSD was a result of being involved in incidents that simulated war. The Board processed his case without the clinic records. In support of his request, he provided documentation associated with his CRSC application. His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 29 May 71, the applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force. He was progressively promoted to the grade of master sergeant having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Dec 82. He was retired on 1 Apr 90. On 9 Oct 08, the applicant submitted an application for CRSC. On 23 Feb 09, his application was disapproved. He requested reconsideration for the PTSD and Tinnitus, but the reconsideration was denied on 10 Mar 09. There was no evidence provided to confirm his disabilities were the direct result of armed conflict, hazardous service, instrumentality of war, or simulating war. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of his request for CRSC. DPPD states the fact the applicant incurred the disability during a period of war/simulating war, in an area of armed conflict/simulated armed conflict, while participating in combat operations/simulated combat operations, or during a period of hazardous service is not sufficient by itself to support a combat-related determination. The PTSD “stressors” attributed to the death of individuals, where the member was not directly involved in the event that caused the death, do not qualify for CRSC. The evidence of record verified the 6 Jul 89 aircraft explosion was a stressful event and an in-service stressor was approved. However, the information provided does not indicate the applicant was directly involved in the aircraft accident. There is no corroborating evidence that indicated he or any others in the tower were in danger from the aircraft explosion. The APFC/DPPD complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states the aircraft explosion on 6 Jul 89 proves he was directly involved in a dangerous simulating war incident. A F4 aircraft exploded in front of the control tower. He felt the impact of the explosion. Him and his crew were given the flight surgeon’s standard “after incident” direct involvement medical/psychological evaluations for air controllers and pilots. He later learned that two crew members did not survive the incident. Unfortunately, over a period of 27 years in the air traffic control field, with direct involvement in aircraft incidents, flight line explosions, aircraft crashes, he can only provide the Board with one documented event. The DVA determined he is a PTSD veteran. 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. 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. 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 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-2009-01170 in Executive Session on 11 Jan 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Mar 09, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 25 Aug 09. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Sep 09. Exhibit E. Letters, Applicant, dated 29 Sep 09 & 19 Oct 09, w/atchs. Panel Chair