RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-00389
            INDEX CODE:  108.07
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While in Vietnam he was required to wear a parachute which weighed heavy  on
his shoulders and he performed heavy flying with very little rest.   He  has
been  awarded  20%  disability  for  degenerative  disc   disease   of   the
lumbosacral spine from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).

In support of his request, the applicant provided  documentation  associated
with his CRSC application.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty in the Regular  Air  Force  on  31 October
1959.  He was progressively promoted to the temporary grade of  major  on  1
February 1971 and permanently promoted to the grade of major  effective  and
with a date of rank of 1 January 1976.   He  served  as  an  Air  Operations
Officer, Navigator and Electronic Warfare Officer.  On 31 October  1979,  he
was relieved from active duty and retired from the Air Force  on  1 November
1979, having served 20 years on active duty.

His CRSC application was disapproved on 1 May 2007 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 the applicant did  perform  duties
as a Navigator, the issue at hand is whether these duties  were  the  direct
cause of his disability.  His service medical records note back  pain,  with
no history of injury during  1966.   In  order  for  the  disability  to  be
eligible for compensation under CRSC, the condition must meet  the  rigorous
standards established for combat-related disabilities and not merely have  a
service connection.  Therefore, there must be documentation that  shows  the
direct combat-related cause of each disability.

Although aircrew duties can be strenuous, conditions developed  through  the
performance of normal service are  not  usually  considered  combat-related.
When considering chronic conditions, such as degenerative arthritis  of  the
spine, under the CRSC guidelines, it may  be  difficult  to  determine  that
armed conflict, hazardous service, instrumentality  of  war,  or  simulating
war was the definitive  cause.   To  be  eligible  for  compensation,  clear
documentation must be provided  to  indicate  an  injury  occurred  and  was
caused by a combat-related  factor  (such  as  ejection  from  an  aircraft)
rather than from routine causes or the veteran’s particular  physical  make-
up.  While the applicant’s condition meets the VA requirements for  service-
connected  compensation,  the   evidence   does   not   support   additional
compensation under CRSC.

The complete DPPD evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluation and states his sitting height was  39”
– 2” more than the maximum height for pilot training.   With  his  parachute
on he did not fit the RB-66C aircraft ejection  seat.   From  November  1961
until August 1965, he incurred approximately 877  flight  hours  over  a  45
month period.  Being with the Tactical Air Command his time was spent  doing
either  combat  crew  training,  joint  exercises  with  the  Army,   flying
reconnaissance missions around Cuba after September  1962,  or  testing  new
jammer equipment for the aircraft at Eglin AFB.   All  of  this  flying  was
related to preparation for combat.  After Vietnam  he  incurred  125  flight
hours over 27 months, all of which was training new pilots,  navigators  and
EWOs going to Vietnam.  During his tour to Vietnam he had 272  flight  hours
over four months.  Being an EWO, not part of the front end crew and  due  to
a shortage of EWOs to man the flights, he helped missions  as  directed  and
rested  when  he  could.   This  was  in  direct  violation  of  Air   Force
Regulations but could not be helped.  100% of his Vietnam  flight  time  was
combat missions over North Vietnam.  His lower back problems were caused  by
the flying conditions in Vietnam.  Though not annotated in his  records,  he
has been informed by many doctors that the cause of his  back  deterioration
was flying hours he performed in Vietnam.

The applicant’s 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.  The available evidence of record does  not
support  a  finding  that  the  service-connected  medical   condition   the
applicant believes is combat-related was 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 this application in  Executive
Session on 19 August 2008, 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 pertaining to AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-
2008-00389 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 January 2008, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 3 April 2008, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 April 2008.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, not dated.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair