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
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00417
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
Pre-Separation) Condition Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam Mid Thoracic Pain w/Compression Fracture with Schmorls 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
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
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
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
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
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...
'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
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
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.