RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00110
            INDEX CODE:  108.07
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  11 Jul 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected medical conditions, cervical myelopathy and  tinnitus,
be assessed as combat related in order to  qualify  for  compensation  under
the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His injury was incurred while lifting a patient during a  training  exercise
while serving as a combat medic.  His health records show his problems  with
is back and neck date back to the 1960's.  The  problem  was  his  neck  all
along.  Because diagnostic equipment was not available at the  time  doctors
were unable to accurately determine  his  medical  condition.   The  problem
worsened during a training exercise when he  was  attempting  to  subdue  an
individual acting the role of a mental patient.  The patient  threw  him  up
against a wall and then to the ground.

His tinnitus is the result of his  duties  on  the  aircraft  tarmac  during
exercises.

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 served in the Regular Army from 26  Jan  61  to  28  Aug  64.   He
contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 4 May 65.   He
was progressively promoted to the grade of senior  master  sergeant,  having
assumed that grade effective and with a date  of  rank  of  1  Sep  86.   He
served as a  First  Sergeant  and  as  a  Medical  Service  Technician.   He
voluntarily retired from the Air Force on 30 Apr 89, having served 28  years
and 21 days on active duty.

Available Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) records  reflect  a  combined
compensable rating of 80% for his unfitting conditions.

His CRSC application was disapproved on 7 Oct 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  his  service  medical  records
contain a review of his service and  DVA  medical  records  reveals  a  long
history of neck pain with treatment noted as early as March 1967.  An  entry
dated 16 Sep 75, notes he was diagnosed with chronic cervical  strain,  four
years prior to the incident that he claims caused his disability.   Injuries
from routine activities, such as lifting  equipment  of  patients,  are  not
sufficient to be considered combat  related,  even  when  the  event  occurs
while performing military duties of training.,  Evidence from  the  time  of
the alleged event does not substantiate his claim  and  the  statement  from
his former commander was prepared after he contacted  his  Congressman,  and
the Congressman's staff contacted DPPD to determine what  type  of  evidence
would be needed to support approval of the application.   Accounts  prepared
many years after-the-fact are not considered as reliable as  those  prepared
at the time of the  event  since  memories  may  be  obscured  by  time  and
perspective.  Based on the evidence provided, it appears his disability  was
the result of a chronic cervical condition that developed many  years  prior
to the lifting incident.  His tinnitus  is  not  eligible  for  compensation
unless it was incidental to a combat related event  or  due  to  documented,
continual, extensive exposure to combat related noise and the condition  was
shown to have manifested itself while in service.   Occasional  exposure  to
aircraft noise is not sufficient  to  warrant  compensation  under  existing
program guidelines.

The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that he did have a muscle strain during his  career.   Some
of that was trying to build his body up to the  appropriate  condition  that
would allow him to lift patients.  The injury occurred several  years  prior
to the training exercise in question and he was returned to duty  indicating
he was fit for service.  Applicant reiterates his account  of  the  incident
he believes resulted in his disability  and  states  that  he  believes  the
intent of the law is that if a person is injured  while  performing  a  task
directly related to an exercise, that person falls into  the  range  of  the
law that states if you are injured due to training exercises then it  should
be approved.  The DPPD statement that accounts prepared  many  years  after-
the-fact are not  considered  as  reliable,  is  just  wrong.   For  medical
personnel, quite often treatment was given during hall room  visits  meaning
they would see doctors between patient visits and would be  treated  without
medical records.

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
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 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-2005-
00110 in Executive Session on 4 Jan 06, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

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

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Jan 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 15 Apr 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Apr 05.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 27 Apr 05, w/atch.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair