Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01530
Original file (BC-2005-01530.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01530
            INDEX CODE:  108.07
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  Not Indicated

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  10 Nov 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His service-connected medical conditions, impaired  hearing,  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 hearing was incurred in 1968 when a mortar round fell on the other  side
of sandbags and destroyed a jeep and most of the sandbags.  His hearing  has
been limited ever since and both ears ring all the time.

In support of his request, applicant provided documentation associated  with
his CRSC application.  His complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant's Military Personnel  Records  were  not  made  available  to  the
Board; therefore, the facts pertaining to his  military  service  cannot  be
verified.  Data extracted from  the  available  documentation  reflects  his
name was placed on the Retired Reserve List on 18 Jul 00, in  the  grade  of
chief master sergeant, awaiting pay at age 60.  He  completed  21  years,  3
months, and 6 days of satisfactory Federal service.  He reached  age  60  on
16 Dec 03.

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

His CRSC application was disapproved on 20 Jan 05 based upon the  fact  that
his service-connected medical conditions were determined not to  be  combat-
related.  His request for compensation for Post  Traumatic  Stress  Disorder
(PTSD) was subsequently approved, rated at 70%.

_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states a review of his  service  and  DVA
medical records shows medical examinations dated 13 Jun 81, 11  Sep  82,  11
Jan 86, and 2 Dec 89 indicates he had normal hearing.  The  applicant  noted
he had not been experiencing  any  ear,  nose  or  throat  trouble,  or  any
hearing loss.  A record of  medical  care  dated  7  May  93  notes  he  was
experiencing ringing in his ears.  In 1993 a  medical  examination  reported
normal hearing.  On 28 Feb 99, a Report of Medical History indicates he  was
experiencing  hearing  loss.   Impaired  hearing  and  tinnitus  cannot   be
considered combat related unless they are incidental  to  a  combat  related
event or due to documented, continual, extensive exposure to combat  related
noise.  There is no mention in any of the  available  medical  documentation
that he experienced acoustic trauma due to  a  mortar  blast  in  1968.   It
appears his hearing conditions did not manifest until nearly 25 years  after
his service in Vietnam.  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 29  Jul
05 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 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-
01530 in Executive Session on 6 Feb 06, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member
      Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 May 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 25 Jul 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Jul 05.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01042

    Original file (BC-2004-01042.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    His complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. If his records had not been destroyed in St. Louis, his records would reflect the disability. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01248

    Original file (BC-2005-01248.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01248 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 15 DEC 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical conditions, impaired hearing and tinnitus, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00768

    Original file (BC-2007-00768.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The VA Rating Decision, dated 25 July 2003, states the applicant’s “service medical records are negative for tinnitus…” No other evidence was provided to indicate this condition began while the applicant was on active duty. After 50 years passage of time, his memory of those early active duty years in the Air Force may not be complete, but he does recall his complaint to the medical personnel at Yokota AFB of ear problems which persist to this day. After a thorough review of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00203

    Original file (BC-2005-00203.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    In order for tinnitus to qualify for CRSC, there must be documentation that clearly shows the condition manifested while in service; however, no evidence of hearing loss or tinnitus was found while he was on active duty. 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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01611

    Original file (BC-2005-01611.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, dated 1 Oct 04, be changed in item 10d, Disability was the Direct Result of a Combat Related Injury, to reflect "Yes." Instrumentality of war is defined as "a vehicle, vessel, or device designed primarily for military Service and intended for use in such Service at the time of the occurrence of the injury. Further, it is our opinion that the service-connected medical condition the applicant believes is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03817

    Original file (BC-2004-03817.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant's service records cannot be located. DPPD states a review of his service and DVA medical records show his duodenal ulcers, impaired hearing, and tinnitus, are not combat related. His records do show he suffered hearing loss while in service; however, impaired hearing and tinnitus cannot be considered combat related unless incidental to a combat related event or due to documented, continual and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01661

    Original file (BC-2004-01661.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. _________________________________________________________________ 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;...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01017

    Original file (BC-2005-01017.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, applicant provided documentation associated with his CRSC application. 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 29 Jul 05 for review and comment within 30 days. After a thorough review of the available evidence of record, it is our opinion that the service-connected medical conditions the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00237

    Original file (BC-2005-00237.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant's service medical records cannot be located. His medical records cannot be located and documentation contained in his personnel records does not confirm hearing loss while in service. 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00535

    Original file (BC-2005-00535.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, applicant provided documentation associated with his CRSC application. Applicant agrees he had other back injuries during his career, the injury in question in the one he received in Vietnam lifting sand bags. 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,...