RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04341 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His service connected disability be re-evaluated under the 
Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His hearing loss, although marginal at the time, did not appear 
to affect the performance of his duties. The follow up exams 
were never adequately completed; even after they were requested 
by medical personnel and this condition was exacerbated due to 
continued hazardous duties. Regardless of the time that has 
passed, the government should be responsible for their actions 
or inactions. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active 
Duty, NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, 
and other supporting documentation. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant retired from the Air National Guard effective 
1 October 1993 in the grade of staff sergeant/E5. 

 

A Department of Veterans Affairs Rating decision dated 
25 January 2010 listed the applicant’s hearing loss as a service 
connected disability with an overall combined disability rating 
of 10 percent. 

 

The applicant requested and was denied CRSC by AFPC/DPSD on 
10 December 2010. He requested reconsideration which was also 
disapproved. AFPC/DPSD explained that service connection from 
the DVA does not automatically qualify a disability as combat 
related under the CRSC program on 19 July 2011. 


AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The evidence 
clearly reveals the applicant had decreased hearing in his left 
ear in 1957 and 1958. Currently, when hearing tests are 
repeated secondary to a screening for potential hearing loss, 
they are conducted after a noise free interval to determine if 
the hearing loss is transient or not. Additionally, in military 
and civilian occupations, hearing protection programs offer high 
level of both awareness and scrutiny of work environments which 
have a high potential to induce hearing loss; these programs did 
not exist years ago. 

 

Regardless of the change in the standard of care, the applicant 
is correct in his conclusion that there is clear documentation 
of high frequency hearing loss (HFHL), and documentation of his 
employment in a high noise area, without documentation of the 
follow-up which had been recommended. However, the available 
records and the applicant’s own statements identify that his 
marginal HFHL at the time neither affected his work performance 
nor his fitness for duty. 

 

The DVA has concluded that his hearing loss is service connected 
and rated him accordingly. As the document suggests, his early 
HFHL did not affect his fitness for duty, accordingly, there is 
no basis for medical retirement, or for compensation 
specifically from the Air Force for this condition. 

 

His request for CRSC was addressed by AFPC/DPSD. In accordance 
with DoDI 1332.38, the purpose of determining if the injury or 
illness is combat related pertains to the applicability of one’s 
disability compensation be exempt from federal taxes. As there 
is no compensation from the physical disability system due in 
this case, there was no condition found which rendered the 
individual unfit for duty, then Combat Related Special 
Compensation does not apply. 

 

The applicant has not met the burden of proof that warrants the 
desired change of record. 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant clarified that he is requesting CRSC. He also 
states that he performed duties on the flight line during mass 
take-offs and landings. These were conducted under simulated 
war time conditions for training and practice. 

 

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 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. The applicant 
has requested that his service medical records be re-evaluated 
under the CRSC program. However, we do not find the applicant’s 
service-connected medical condition is 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. As such, we agree with the opinion 
and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant’s 
condition, while rated service-connected by the DVA, was not 
unfitting for service and therefore, does not meet the mandatory 
criteria for compensation under the CRSC program. 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 issues involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 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-2011-04341 in Executive Session on 13 November 2012, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

 

 


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-04341 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Oct 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 28 Jun 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 25 Jul 12. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, undated. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair