Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00768
Original file (BC-2007-00768.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-00768
            INDEX CODE:  108.07

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  14 SEP 08

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes his tinnitus is the result of performing flight line duties.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a personal  statement  and
documentation associated with his CRSC application.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant having served 24 years, 2 months, and 5 days  on  active  duty
retired on 3 December 1992 in the grade of staff sergeant.  He served as  an
Administration Specialist.

Available Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) records  reflect  a  combined
compensable  rating  of  10%  from  26  December  2002  for  his   unfitting
conditions.

His CRSC application was disapproved on 20  December  2006  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  in  the  applicant’s  initial
application, he indicated that he believes his tinnitus is due to the  noise
exposure  he  experienced  while  serving  as  a   radar   mechanic.    When
considering hearing conditions, the CRSC Board  can  only  approve  them  if
there is clear evidence  that  the  individual  was  exposed  to  prolonged,
routine combat-related  noise,  and  that  the  condition  began  while  the
individual was still in the service.

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.

Although the applicant’s conditions have been service-connected by  the  VA,
CRSC criteria require documentation to support a  qualifying  combat-related
event or events as the direct cause of the  disability.   Simply  performing
duties in an armed conflict or exercise environment, performing  maintenance
on a military aircraft/vehicle,  or  performing  hazardous  service  (flight
crew, EOD, pararescue, etc.) does not automatically  qualify  an  individual
for CRSC.

The DPPD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states that from the summer of 1955 until the winter of  1956,
he served as a flight line radar mechanic at Yokota AFB, Japan.   He  worked
on the airborne intercept radar installed in  the  F-86D  jet  fighter.   He
worked eight hour shifts as a black box mechanic doing pre-flight and  post-
flight checks  on  the  F-86D  radar  sets  (E-4,  5  &  6  series  systems,
manufactured by Hughes Aircraft Company).  Noise levels were extremely  high
as the fighter jets taxied in and out of the area on their way to  and  from
the runway.  During one  of  his  visits  to  the  VA  he  complained  about
tinnitus or ringing in  the  ears;  however,  there  is  no  record  of  his
complaint included in his VA records.  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.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachment, 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
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 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 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-2007-
00768 in Executive Session on 23 July 2007, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Dec 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 10 Apr 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Apr 07.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 19 Apr 07.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00768

    Original file (BC-2004-00768.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the absence of a specific traumatic event resulting in significant, documented spine injury, it is impossible to attribute direct causation of degenerative spine disease to aerial flight. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01272

    Original file (BC-2005-01272.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01272 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 OCT 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical conditions, tinnitus and impaired hearing, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01663

    Original file (BC-2006-01663.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement with nine attachments, his DD Form 214, Statement of Service, Retirement Orders, and other 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 25 Aug 06 (Exhibit D) for review and comment within 30 days. ...

  • 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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-03390

    Original file (BC-2003-03390.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03390 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical conditions, neck strain, chronic low back pain, hemorrhoids and impairment of sphincter control, ingrown toenails, sinusitis, tinnitus, and hypertension, be assessed as combat related in order to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2003-04306

    Original file (BC-2003-04306.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    A review of his medical records reveals no record of such injuries, although while stationed at Kadena AB, he injured his back lifting furniture. The Medical Consultant states he asserts his back was injured during a rocket attack in Vietnam either by falling off a helicopter or when a comrade fell on his back seeking shelter. He also asserts his back and knee conditions were caused by his duties during aerial flight.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02790

    Original file (BC-2003-02790.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02790 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical condition, degenerative arthritis of both hips, hearing loss, and tinnitus, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act. ...

  • 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-2005-02593

    Original file (BC-2005-02593.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02593 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 DEC 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical condition, 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-2006-01992

    Original file (BC-2006-01992.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In this letter, the doctor provides his opinion that the applicant’s back condition should be considered combat-related because “These complicated degenerative changes and neurological deficits are an occupational condition secondary to cumulative trauma over twenty years of flying, not from an isolated injury.” The doctor also stated that “applicant’s lumbar spine disease and neurological sequellae are based on a reasonable degree of medical certainty, causally related to flying airplanes...