RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00767
            INDEX CODE:  108.07
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected medical condition, traumatic  arthritis  of  his  left
foot, be assessed as combat related in order  to  qualify  for  compensation
under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His condition is directly related to flying duties during the  Gulf  War  in
1990 and should have been determined  as  combat  related.   His  left  foot
received  blunt  trauma  during  a  strategic   airlift   mission   directly
supporting Operation DESERT SHIELD.  It was because of  the  criticality  of
the wartime mission that he elected to continue with the mission instead  of
seeking immediate medical care.  The injury occurred while  he  was  helping
offload cargo at a classified location.  Although  pilots  do  not  normally
help in loading/offloading of cargo,  minimizing  ground  time  was  of  the
essence.  While offloading one of the pallets his foot was  jammed  under  a
pallet.  He reported to the  flight  surgeon's  office  for  treatment  upon
return to his home station.  This injury has led to ongoing  foot  pain  and
degeneration in the impacted joint.  His condition meets  the  criteria  for
CRSC as combat  related  and  because  it  was  incurred  while  engaged  in
hazardous service.

In support of his request, applicant  provided  a  personal  statement,  his
CRSC denial letter, and documents extracted  from  his  medical  and  flight
records.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve of the Air Force on  21
Mar 76 and was progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of  colonel,  having
assumed that grade effective and with a date  of  rank  of  1  Jan  95.   He
served as an Airlift Pilot and in Planning and Programming.  On 31  Jul  98,
he voluntarily retired for years of service.  He served 22 years, 4  months,
and 10 days on active duty

Current Department of Veterans Affairs  (DVA)  records  reflect  a  combined
compensable rating of 60% for his unfitting conditions.

His CRSC application  was  approved  on  24  Feb  04  for  his  degenerative
arthritis  but  his   remaining   conditions,   benign   growth   of   skin,
arteriosclerotic heart disease, and  traumatic  arthritis  were  disapproved
based upon the fact  that  the  service-connected  medical  conditions  were
determined not to be combat-related.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD  states  applicant  submitted  a  medical
entry that states "left foot injury during recent aircraft mission"  with  a
diagnosis  of  "foot   bruised,   mild   adema,   pain   specific   to   2nd
metatarsophalangeal joint"  and  "dislocation  resolved."   Another  medical
entry dated 30 Jun 95 states he "stubbed 2nd  toe  left  foot  getting  into
airplane 2 1/2  years  ago..."   The  DVA  granted  service  connection  for
"residuals of injury to left second toe, compatible with degenerative  joint
disease."  The DVA granted this disability stating  "...pain  started  after
the veteran injured the joint getting  into  an  airplane  while  on  active
duty."  The fact that a member may  have  incurred  a  disability  during  a
period of war or in an area of armed conflict is not sufficient  to  support
a  combat  related  determination.   There  must  be   a   definite   causal
relationship  between  the  armed  conflict  and  the  resulting   unfitting
disability.  This injury is also not considered caused by hazardous  service
as cargo handling, a duty not normally associated with pilot duties, is  not
considered hazardous duty.

The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states the definite causal relationship can be found in  the  fact
that his injury would  not  have  occurred  if  he  was  not  a  crewmember,
performing official duties, during ongoing combat operations.  According  to
CRSC  guidance,  determination  of  combat  relatedness,  while  engaged  in
hazardous service includes, but is not limited to, aerial flight,  parachute
duty, demolition duty, experimental duty, and diving duty.  A  finding  that
a disability is the result of  such  hazardous  service  requires  that  the
injury or disease be the direct result of actions taken in  the  performance
of such service.  His injury occurred while he was a flight crewmember on  a
military combat mission in the theater  of  operations.   It  is  true  that
normally the aircraft commander/pilots do not  assist  in  loading/unloading
operations.  However, given that they were operating in a combat zone, in  a
high-threat situation, where minimizing ground  time  was  essential,  every
available  crewmember  assisted  in  offloading  the  cargo.   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 believe 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-
00767 in Executive Session on 6 Apr 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 3 Mar 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 21 May 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 May 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 7 Jun 04.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair