ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03907 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: XXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His honorable discharge be changed to a disability discharge. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: A similar appeal was considered and denied by the Board on 27 March 2008. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s appeal and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F. In a letter, dated 9 January 2009, the applicant requests reconsideration. He states the hypersensitivity issue as described in AFOSH 48-8 was never considered by the Board. The evaluation fails to make the connection that any exposure injury to these chemicals, while performing his military duties, should be considered an LOD injury. AFOSH 48-8 1.2.4 requires that once workers suspect that material in the workplace has had an impact on their health, the worker must be evaluated by a physician under the direction of the Aerospace Medical Council. He never received proper advice or care. His bronco challenge report indicate he is indeed hypersensitive and the LOD evaluation should have been performed with this standard being applied.(Exhibit G). ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: In an earlier finding, the Board determined there was insufficient evidence to warrant any corrective action. After thoroughly reviewing the additional documentation submitted in support of this appeal and the evidence of record, we do not believe the applicant has overcome the rationale expressed in the previous decision. We note the applicant’s counsel’s assertion that the applicant did not receive a proper medical evaluation and that the attending physician did not perform tests that could diagnose whether the applicant has any hypersensitivity to the exposure in the workplace. However the medical evidence provided is insufficient for us to reach this conclusion. Should the applicant submit new evidence not previously considered by the Board, such as physical fitness test results during his entire military service, medical documentation from military and civilian sources regarding his clinical history, presentation and treatments, and pre and post deployment physical assessments reflecting a total absence of a chronic respiratory ailment or symptoms suggestive of asthma, or a previous history of asthma that is now of a far greater level of severity than would be expected through its natural progression, further reconsideration of this case may be warranted. However, we do not find that the evidence currently before us is sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought. Therefore, the applicant’s request is again denied. ________________________________________________________________ _ 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-2007-03907 in Executive Session on 11 March 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-03907 was considered: Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 21 April 2008, w/atchs. Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 9 January 2009, w/atchs.