RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01771
            INDEX CODE:  108.07
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  7 Dec 05

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected medical  condition,  disability  of  brain  or  spinal
cord, be assessed as combat related in order  to  qualify  for  compensation
under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His injuries were incurred while  conducting  missile  recovery  activities,
during a combat-related exercise.  In conducting an Atlas  Missile  recovery
he had to go into a Mechanical and Electrical room.  After determining  that
a propellant valve had failed to actuate he  took  the  required  action  to
manually cycle the  valve.   The  high-pressure  valve  opened  creating  an
unanticipated extremely loud noise,  which  shocked  both  himself  and  his
technician.  The technician reacted by swinging his shoulder  and  arm  into
the applicant, pushing him into a group of pipes and other metal  equipment,
resulting in severe pain in his back.

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 was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve of the  Air  Force  and
was voluntarily ordered to extended  active  duty  on  26 Aug  60.   He  was
progressively promoted to the grade of colonel, having  assumed  that  grade
effective and with a date of rank of  1  Apr  79.   He  served  as  a  Space
Systems Staff Officer, Scientific Analyst,  and  an  Aeronautical  Engineer.
On 30 Sep 81, he voluntarily retired for years of  service.   He  served  21
years, 1 month, and 5 days on active duty.

Current Department of Veterans Affairs  (DVA)  records  reflect  a  combined
compensable rating of 90% for his unfitting conditions.
His CRSC application was disapproved on 20 Apr 04 based upon the  fact  that
his service-connected medical condition was determined  not  to  be  combat-
related.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states a review of his  service  and  DVA
medical records show his brain  or  spinal  cord  condition  is  not  combat
related.  There is no mention of a back injury  in  1964.   His  records  do
reveal he has an annotation dated 5 Dec 77 stating he has "a history of  two
years of spastic paraparesis."  A doctor's report dated 25  Mar  77,  states
he injured his back at the age of 14 when he "jumped a distance of two  feet
backward from a flag pole, landing on feet.  Sudden pain in the  back  about
the belt line."  The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant  reiterates  his  contentions  he  has  established  the  exercise
mandated by SAC regulations  to  verify  crew  capabilities  and  to  verify
missile launch capability clearly meets the  criteria  as  under  conditions
simulating  war.   He  did  not  even  know  the  incident  had  caused  his
disability until 1993.  The injury resulted in damage to  a  neural  control
center that an  x-ray  could  not  have  revealed.  Air  Force  and  private
neurologists indicated he had either  MS  or  MD  for  many  years  and  had
prescribed medication to address the incorrect diagnosis.  Ten  years  after
his injury to his back at age  14  he  entered  the  Air  Force  in  perfect
condition, or he would not have qualified for entry.  His complete  response
is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical  Consultant  recommends  denial.   The  Medical  Consultant
states the applicant indicates his incident occurred in 1964.  There are  no
entries in his service medical record back to 1960  for  complaint  of  back
pain or back injury.  On 16 Sep 71, he presented to the clinic for a  pulled
dorsal spine.  On 8 May 74 he presented for mid lower back  pain  aggravated
by soccer practice.  There are  no  other  service  medical  record  entries
preceding the time of onset of his spastic paraparesis  that  would  suggest
traumatic  etiology.   There  is  no  documentary  evidence  confirming   he
sustained a clinically significant back injury during conditions  simulating
war.  There is no medical evidence  of  any  significant  spinal  injury  or
medical evidence in  the  record  that  links  his  spinal  condition  to  a
traumatic injury.
The Medical Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy  of  the  additional  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 13 Apr 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
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 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 issue  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-2004-
01771 in Executive Session on 1 Jun 05, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Mr. Christopher Carey, Member
      Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 May 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 28 Jun 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jul 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, not dated.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 8 Apr 05.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 13 Apr 05.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair