Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02527
Original file (BC-2006-02527.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02527
            INDEX CODE:  100.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  28 FEB 08

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be changed to reflect a back injury that occurred  as  a  result
of an aircraft crash that occurred on 29 July 1954.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His medical  records  state  that  on  24  August  1954,  no  injuries  were
sustained from  an  aircraft  accident  at  Tyndall  AFB  on  29 July  1954.
However, his back injury occurred as a result of this accident.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a  personal  statement,  a
statement from his physician, documents extracted from  his  flight  records
and several photographs.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant with 23 years, 2 months, and 2 days on active duty  retired  on  1
May 1975 in the grade of lieutenant colonel.

In August 1954, applicant was evaluated secondary to  an  aircraft  accident
on 29 July 1954 after a belly landing on a beach  in  a  T33  aircraft  with
ejection seat failure.  He reported no injuries and was cleared  to  fly  by
his home base flight surgeon.

On 21 October 1954, he was involved in another aircraft accident (nose  gear
collapse in an F-86D).  He reported no injuries and  was  medically  cleared
for full flying duty.

Available Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) records  reflect  a  combined
compensable rating of 70% from 8  November  2005  for  traumatic  arthritis,
lumbosacral spine with spinal stenosis rated at 40%, prostate cancer  status
post radical prostatectomy rated at 20%, facial scars rated  at  10%,  right
lower extremity peripheral neuropathy associated with  traumatic  arthritis,
lumbosacral spine rated at 10%, left lower extremity  peripheral  neuropathy
associated  with  traumatic  arthritis,  lumbosacral  spine  rated  at  10%,
residuals, right elbow injury rated at  0%,  residuals,  right  knee  injury
rated at 0%, hearing loss,  left  ear  rated  at  0%,  erectile  dysfunction
associated with prostate cancer status post radical prostatectomy  rated  at
0%.

Applicant filed a CRSC application that was partially  approved  on  5  June
2006 for a urinary condition,  impaired  hearing,  and  a  malignant  growth
genitourinary.  However, it was disapproved for back and leg injuries  based
upon the fact that his service-connected medical conditions were  determined
not to be combat-related.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends  denial.   The  Medical  Consultant
states after the aircraft accident of 29  July  1954  the  applicant  stated
that he related “no injuries” in order to avoid over  night  hospitalization
for observation.  He claims that he was given  muscle  relaxants  and  never
saw a physician again during his tour as an advanced flying school  student.
 He denied an injury because he did not want any health problems  documented
on his medical records that might interfere with  his  flying  status.   The
Medical Consultant opines that if the applicant  elected  not  to  have  any
injury recorded on his record, it would be  unlikely  that  this  previously
non-reported injury would be sufficient  to  cause  medical  problems  forty
years later.  Compression fractures or other significant injuries are  quite
painful and would probably caused the applicant to seek medical care or,  at
minimum would leave a more lasting memory at the time of his  evaluation  of
December 1975.  Furthermore there was no evidence of traumatic spine  injury
including compression fractures visualized on x-ray at that  time  (December
1975).

The applicant now claims  that  he  was  experiencing  medical  difficulties
during a sufficient portion of his flying career, while continuing  to  fly,
thus endangering the lives  of  others  and  increasing  the  potential  for
mission failure.  He also alleges that the  compression  fracture  caused  a
tilt to his back that, in turn, caused pressure on his left  hip,  resulting
in a total hip replacement on 29 January 2003.  There is no evidence in  the
service medical record  that  his  back  was  tilted  or  had  any  abnormal
curvature to the spine.  There is no evidence of  any  hip  pain  or  injury
reported while the applicant was on active duty,  or  that  the  minor  back
pains he noted while in the Air Force could  have  contributed  to  his  hip
pain.  X-rays taken during his initial VA evaluation  in  1975  showed  mild
narrowing of the  lumbosacral  interspace  (L5-S1).   Compression  fractures
were not visualized at that time.  The fourth lumbar  vertebral  compression
fracture reportedly was not present during a bone scan of 5 March  2002  but
subsequently was visualized on a bone scan of 10 December 2002.

In December 1975, over six months after retirement, x-rays failed to  reveal
any compression fractures.   Thus,  the  applicant’s  compression  fractures
occurred after completion of military service.  The evidence of record  does
indicate that he did have several episodes of back  problems  that  resolved
quickly while on active duty.  It is possible that he had  a  predisposition
for back problems, especially when coupled with  the  occupational  physical
stressors associated with flying activities.  However, linking any of  these
injuries to his later medical problems would be speculative  at  best.   The
applicant clearly did not have an unfitting condition at  the  time  of  his
retirement and thus was not eligible for disability evaluation upon  leaving
active duty.

The BCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the  evaluation  and  states  he  believes  his  back
injuries started with the aircraft accident on 29  August  1954  and  slowly
worsened over many years.  The most  recent  technological  improvements  in
the CT scans are the first to show the real problems and how much  his  back
has deteriorated.

Applicant’s complete evaluation, with attachments, 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 not timely filed; however, it is in  the  interest
of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence of an  error  or  injustice.   After  a  thorough  review  of  the
evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we  are  of  the  opinion
that relief is  not  warranted  and  the  applicant  has  not  provided  any
evidence which would lead us to  believe  otherwise.   His  contentions  are
duly noted; however, the detailed comments  provided  by  the  BCMR  Medical
Consultant adequately address  these  allegations.   Therefore,  we  are  in
agreement  with  the  comments  and  recommendation  of  the  BCMR   Medical
Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our  decision  that  the
applicant has not been the victim of either an error or injustice.  In  view
of the above and in the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of an error or injustice; the application was  denied  without
a personal appearance; and 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-2006-
02527 in Executive Session on 26 July 2007, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

      Ms. BJ White-Olson, Panel Chair
      Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
      Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Aug 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 11 Jun 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Jun 07.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 25 Jun 07.





                                   BJ WHITE-OLSON
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00417

    Original file (PD-2014-00417.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the VASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The VA rated the L3 fracture 40% based on the limitation of thoracolumbar motion at the time of the post-separation VA C&P examination and 10% for pelvic fracture based on report of right hip pain at the C&P examination.Service treatment records prior to separation...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00627

    Original file (PD-2012-00627.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pre-Separation) Condition Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam Mid Thoracic Pain w/Compression Fracture with Schmorl’s Nodes 5299-5295 10% T6 Compression Fracture w/Insomnia 5285-5291 20% 20020709 Right Hip Pain (trochanteric bursitis) Not Unfitting Right Hip Greater Trochantitis 5252 0%* 20020709 Somatic Dysfunction of Cervico-thoracic and rib areas Not Unfitting No VA Entry No Additional MEB/PEB Entries Other x 3 20020709 Rating: 10% Rating: 20% Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058583C070421

    Original file (2001058583C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT STATES : That she had a compression fracture from an injury that she received in Kuwait. An 8 June 2001 VA medical record shows that she was receiving a 60 percent disability rating for neck and back pain, that the applicant stated that her problem had been progressively getting worse. Physical evaluation boards are established to evaluate all cases of physical disability equitability for the soldier and the Army.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03641

    Original file (BC-2003-03641.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Having reviewed his medical and personnel records, and documents supporting the aircraft accident it appears that his injuries are not considered to be eligible for CRSC. In support of his submission, applicant provided a personal statement, documents extracted from his medical records, and a document associated with his CRSC application. The applicant requests changes be made to his 12 Jan 61 Aircraft Accident Report.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02570

    Original file (PD-2013-02570.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On examination, he was noted to have 63 degrees of flexion and that 3/5 signs of non-organic pain were present. At the MEB examination on 16 April 2004 (5 months prior to separation), the CI reported on going back pain. Thoracolumbar ROM (Degrees)PT ~10 Mo.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02590

    Original file (PD-2013-02590.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Mid-Back Pain Condition . There was no increase in kyphosis at T12.The diagnosis rendered was T12 compression fracture with recalcitrant activity associated back pain.At the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination on25 October 2007, 4 months after separation, the CI reported slight sensory impairment at the site of the fracture at the thoracolumbar junction and in the lower sacral area extending to the gluteal fold along the left side of the buttock. The Board determined that there...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014353

    Original file (20080014353.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The physician found the sleeping and depressive problems related only to his pain that he was experiencing and noted on the DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination) that this neurologic and psychiatric evaluations were considered normal. The opinion further stated that on 4 March 2005 an informal PEB found the applicant unfit for back and pelvic pain and rated the pain under VASRD code 5237, lumbosacral pain, at 10 percent, separate with severance pay. The medical evidence of record...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9603751

    Original file (9603751.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    'The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request .and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The records indicate that the applicant met a Medical Evaluation Board on 28 Aug 73, and his history then reflected back pain which was not further evaluated, nor was this done on subsequent reevaluations when he continued to note the back pain on the medical history form. Even assuming the minimal compression fracture noted some...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076951C070215

    Original file (2002076951C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In April 2002, the applicant requested to be continued on active duty. The Board notes the applicant's and his counsel's contentions that he should have been rated at least 50 percent; however, there is no evidence to show that the USAPDA rated the applicant incorrectly or that the rating was based on Doctor A___'s alleged complaints (for which no evidence is provided) about the applicant's "disrespect." The Board notes counsel's contention that VASRD code 5292 provides for a 20 percent...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00191

    Original file (PD 2012 00191.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI was then medically separated with a 20% combined disability rating. A C&P examination on 15 April 2006, 6 months after separation, for the ankles and knees noted that the CI had most of his pain in the knees and ankles, but that the hips and back were also involved. The Board determined that the MEB examination and ROM better fit the condition of the CI at the time of separation.