RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2011-01511

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be entitled to benefits under the Combat-Related Special 
Compensation (CRSC) program.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His neck injury which he incurred as a result of flying combat 
missions in Vietnam entitles him to benefits under CRSC.  His 
civilian medical provider has found that his neck condition was 
connected to his flying duties during combat.

In support of his appeal, he provides a personal statement; a 
letter from his civilian medical provider, unsigned, and 
additional documents.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant, a member of the Air Force Reserve, was 
transferred to the USAF Retired List, effective 24 Jun 08, at 
age 60.  He was credited with 22 years, 4 months, and 25 days of 
satisfactory Federal service for retirement.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial stating, in part, that his 
condition does not meet the mandatory criteria for compensation 
under the CRSC program.

The applicant submitted a CRSC claim for mitral valve prolapse, 
lumbar scoliosis, thoracic scoliosis, post traumatic stress 
disorder (PTSD), hypertension, blepharitis and pes planus.  His 
claim was initially disapproved since he did not meet the 
minimum eligibility criteria and was not receiving disability 
compensation payments from the Department of Veterans Affairs 
(DVA). The applicant was partially approved on 24 Aug 09 for 
PTSD, diabetes, tinnitus, hypertension and impaired hearing.  He 
provided additional information and was subsequently approved 
for his remaining conditions, except for his neck.  The 
applicant requested reconsideration of the Board's disapproval 
of compensation for his neck, but the request was denied 
2 Jan 11.  No evidence was provided to confirm this disability 
was the direct result of armed conflict, hazardous service, 
instrumentality of war, or simulating war.  

The applicant contends that he was hospitalized in Vietnam for a 
neck injury incurred while f1ying combat missions.  DPSDC 
requested documents from the VA to justify approval of his 
request.  Specifically, in September 2009 and again in May 2011, 
DPSDC requested in-service medical documents (from the time of 
the injury in 1972) reflecting a neck injury while flying.  
However, they were not able to obtain supporting documentation.  
By law, determinations of whether a disability is combat related 
will be based on the preponderance of available documentary 
information. All relevant documentary information is to be 
weighed in relation to known facts and circumstances, and 
determinations will be made on the basis of credible, objective 
documentary information in the records as distinguished from 
personal opinion, speculation, or conjecture.  Additionally, in 
accordance with DD Form 2860, Claim for Combat-Related Special 
Compensation (CRSC), the fact that a member incurred a 
disability during a period of armed cont1ict or while 
participating in combat operations is not sufficient by itself 
to support a combat-related determination.  There must be a 
definite, documented, causal relationship between the armed 
cont1ict and the resulting disability.  For example, a medical 
document reflecting "Member strained his shoulder while flying 
today when he was slammed against the aircraft wall during a 
hard landing" shows a direct relationship to a combat-related 
event.  However, as an example, an injury from a fall, simply 
from walking through the aircraft (not caused by turbulence, 
evasive maneuvers or a hard landing, but rather from a misstep) 
would not have a direct relationship to a combat-related event. 
There is no documentation confirming the applicant was injured 
during flight.  

The Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program, 
established by Public Law (PL) 107-314, provides compensation to 
certain retirees with combat-related disabilities.  A retired 
member of the Uniformed Services must meet each of the four 
following conditions to meet the preliminary CRSC criteria:

	a.  Has 20 or more years of active service in the Uniformed 
Services for the purpose of computing the amount of retired pay, 
or is entitled to retired pay under section 12731 of Title 10, 
United States Code, unless such retirement is under section 
12731b of that same title or (the member is retired under 
Chapter 61 (disability retired).

	b.  Is in retired status.

	c.  Is entitled to retired pay, notwithstanding that such 
retired pay may be reduced due to receipt of Department of 
Veterans Affairs (DVA) disability compensation.

	d.  Has qualifying disability ratings (percentages) 
[retiree must be entitled to compensation for service-connected 
disabilities under 10 USC 38 by the DVA].

		Qualifying Combat-Related Disability:  Member has 
combat-related disabilities (which include any Purple Heart 
disabilities) that are compensated by the DVA.

The complete AFPC/DPSDC evaluation, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant notes that DPSD has erroneously determined that 
his neck disability was not caused by combat or combat-related 
flight training.  DPSD has impermissibly rewritten the governing 
statute to exclude flying training as a source for benefits 
under CRSC.

He notes that DPSD indicated that he was partially approved for 
his conditions; however, his severe degeneration of his cervical 
spine remains denied.  He has provided statements from a medical 
provider linking his cervical disk disease to an acute neck 
strain incurred while flying combat (missions?)in Vietnam in 
1972, as well as many years of air combat training.  The Board 
must conclude that the preponderance of medical evidence links 
his cervical disk disease to combat or combat-related flight 
training.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a letter from a 
medical provider, unsigned, including an amendment to his 
response.

The applicant’s complete response, 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 error or injustice.  We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case; however, 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.  While the 
applicant asserts that DPSD has erroneously determined that his 
neck injury was not caused by combat or combat-related flight 
training and impermissibly rewritten the law to exclude flying 
training, we are not lead to the same conclusion by the evidence 
of record.  In this respect, DPSD notes that there must be a 
definite, documented, causal relationship between the armed 
conflict and the resulting disability; however, the evidence of 
record and that provided by the applicant fail to corroborate 
his claims.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) 
involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-
2011-01511 in Executive Session on 24 October 2011, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Apr 11, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSDC, dated 9 Jun 11, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Jul 11.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Aug 11, w/atchs.




                                   Panel Chair