RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-04055
            INDEX CODE:  108.07
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  service-connected  medical  conditions,  injuries  of  both  knees  and
ankles, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify  for  compensation
under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He injured his knees and ankles in July 1973, while assigned  to  Korat  AB,
Thailand.  He fell off the ladder of an F-105  aircraft  while  exiting  the
aircraft after a combat mission.  After his injury he was sent  to  see  the
flight surgeon at the Medical Center in U-Tapao, Thailand

His complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve of the  Air  Force  and
was voluntarily ordered to extended  active  duty  on  30 Apr  64.   He  was
progressively promoted to the grade of lieutenant  colonel,  having  assumed
that grade effective and with a date of rank of 15 Jun 80.  He served  as  a
pilot.  On 30 Apr 85, he voluntarily  retired  for  years  of  service.   He
served 21 years and 1 day on active duty

Current Department of Veterans Affairs  (DVA)  records  reflect  a  combined
compensable rating of 90 % for his unfitting conditions,  which  includes  a
rating of 40% for his right ankle, 40% for  his  left  ankle,  30%  for  his
right knee.  His left  knee  condition  is  determined  not  to  be  service
connected.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states no  incident,  which  specifically
references an injury resulting from a fall from an F-105  aircraft,  can  be
found in his medical records.  He had a  history  of  joint  trouble  dating
back as early as 1964.  Other injuries include reduction  of  the  navicular
bone and partial fusion to the wrist in  September  1964;  a  hyperextension
injury to his right knee and left knee in 1968; and,  a  right  knee  injury
incurred while skiing in Europe in 1970.  His left  knee  condition  is  not
considered service connected by the DVA.

Injuries when military aircraft are involved, when the injuries  not  caused
by the device itself are considered as error or misjudgment.   His  injuries
fail to meet the established criteria for favorable consideration under  the
provisions  of  performance  of  duty  under  conditions   simulating   war,
instrumentality of war, actual combat,  hazardous  service,  or  other  CRSC
categories.

The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 20  Feb
04 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office  has
received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical  Consultant  recommends  denial.   The  Medical  Consultant
states his entrance examination documents a pre-service history of  a  right
knee injury at age 17 in a motor  vehicle  accident  and  left  knee  sprain
playing football at age 22.  DVA records contain entries for  a  right  knee
injury in 1976 while skiing initially and in intramural sports that  led  to
eventual knee surgery with osteotomy and pinning.  There are no  entries  in
any of the available medical records that make  reference  to  the  incident
when he reports he fell off the ladder in July 1973.  There is  no  evidence
in the applicant's record  that  his  service  connected  disabilities  were
incurred as a direct result of armed conflict, while  engaged  in  hazardous
service, while engaged in performance of duties under conditions  simulating
war, as a result of instrumentality of war, or other qualifying  conditions.


The Medical Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy  of  the  additional  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 10 Nov 04 for review and comment within 30 days.   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.  After a thorough review of  the  available
evidence of record, it is our opinion  that  the  service-connected  medical
conditions the applicant believes are combat-related were  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,  do  not  qualify  for  compensation
under the CRSC Act.  We agree with the opinions and recommendations  of  the
Air Force offices of primary responsibility and  adopt  their  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.

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-2003-
04055 in Executive Session on 23 Feb 05, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member
      Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Dec 03.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 16 Feb 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Feb 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 5 Nov 04.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 10 Nov04.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair