RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-02590

								COUNSEL:  NONE

								HEARING DESIRED:  YES

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Correct the Line of Duty (LOD) finding of existed prior to 
service (EPTS – LOD Not Applicable) for chronic asthmatic 
bronchitis and chronic sinusitis, to reflect in the line of duty 
(ILOD), in block 11 of the AFRC IMT 348, dated 24 September 
2008.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The LOD board finding of EPTS – LOD NA was made in error.  The 
AFRC IMT 348 that was submitted contained false statements in 
blocks 5 and 6;  

	a. The Anthrax booster was given on 29 April 2000, 
approximately two years prior to his deployment to Qatar, not in 
2002 as stated.  

	b. At that time, his primary medical doctor was treating him 
for upper and lower respiratory issues and not just sinusitis as 
stated.  

	c. The pulmonary specialist diagnosed him with chronic 
asthmatic bronchitis secondary to reactive airway dysfunction 
syndrome (RADS) caused by exposure to silica (dust particles), 
not chronic bronchitis secondary to anthrax vaccination as 
described in blocks 5 and 6.  

	d. He submitted a request for reinvestigation on 
26 September 2009.  His request was reviewed by the wing 
commander and the JAG and found to warrant a reinvestigation.  
The reinvestigation was not given due process as it was denied 
by AFRC/CV.  

The LOD board made a determination based on false statements. 
This was evidenced by the Air Force’s response to a 
congressional inquiry into the matter dated 21 February 2012, 
which stated his claim of chronic bronchitis and chronic 
sinusitis were linked to the Anthrax vaccination.  This was 
untrue and unsupported.  

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

______________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to copies of documents extracted from his Military 
Personnel Record (MPR) the applicant is a former member of the 
Air Force Reserves.  

The applicant was activated from May through September 2002; the 
LOD determinations were initiated on 22 May 2008.  The 
recommended finding of “In Line of Duty” (ILOD) was approved by 
the appointing authority.  Subsequent to completion of the 
coordination process, the approving authority’s decision was 
“EPTS - LOD Not Applicable.”

Effective 29 January 2013, the applicant was permanently 
disability retired in the grade of TSgt per AFI 36-3212, 
Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, and Separation, 
with a compensable percentage for physical disability of 100 
percent.  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/SG recommends denial.  SG states no injustice has occurred 
to the applicant.  The applicant received extensive 
consideration and reconsideration of his case and failed 
repeatedly to meet the standard of medical evidence to find in 
the line of duty.  

	a. A review of the history indicates that the applicant was 
mobilized from 21 May through 21 December 2002, and was deployed 
to Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar, for 90 days during this 
mobilization.  Between April 2000 and February 2009, the 
applicant received five anthrax vaccinations.  He began to feel 
ill in Dec 2002 and felt he was having recurrent cold or allergy 
symptoms.  For the next year, the applicant treated these 
symptoms with over the counter medication.  Due to worsening 
symptoms, in December 2003, the applicant saw his primary care 
physician and after months of treatment for a respiratory 
infection/bronchitis with various medications and little 
improvement, he was referred to a pulmonary specialist.  

	b. In conjunction with the respiratory issues, in 
September 2008, the applicant complained of soreness in his legs 
and feet.  He was seen by a Rheumatologist for a diagnosis of 
rheumatoid arthritis.  In that same time period, the applicant 
was also diagnosed with thyroiditis.  The applicant filed a 
total of seven LOD cases, five for separate diagnoses and two 
for reinvestigation during the period of 2005 through 2010.  Two 
of the cases were found in line of duty: Adenopathy secondary to 
a vaccination (Dec 2007) and Reactive Polyarthralgias (Nov 
2008).  

	c. The finding of EPTS for a Reserve member is based on 
entry into the period of service during which the conditions 
manifested and the symptoms presented themselves IAW AFI 36-
2910, Line of Duty (Misconduct) Determination, paragraph 3.4.1.  
Furthermore, DODI 1332.38, Physical Disability Evaluation, 
E3.P4.5.2, notes that conditions which exhibit signs or symptoms 
within less than medically recognized incubation periods after 
entry into active service will be accepted as evidence that the 
disease existed prior to military service unless overcome by 
evidence to the contrary.  

		(1). The initial claim for a service connection to the 
applicant’s Chronic Sinusitis, Asthmatic Bronchitis, and Thyroid 
Disease attempted to overcome this connection by linking the 
conditions to the anthrax vaccination.  

		(2). The work-up at the vaccine health centers at Wilford 
Hall Medical Center and Walter Reed in April 2007 found no 
connection between any of these conditions and the anthrax 
vaccination.  

		(3). There was no scientific literature or case study that 
supported this claim.  When the claim for anthrax connection was 
denied, a claim for silica exposure was put forward without any 
substantial medical documentation.  This claim was also 
thoroughly reviewed.  

	d. Following the January 2008 EPTS determination, the 
applicant’s case was reviewed for potential service aggravation 
defined in DODI 133.38, E2.1.32., as the permanent worsening of 
a pre-service medical condition above the natural progression of 
the condition caused by trauma or the nature of military 
service.  There was no evidence presented for service 
aggravation.  The finding of EPTS-LOD NA and evidence to support 
such findings was IAW with all applicable guidance and policy.  

	e. With respect to the reinvestigation process, they did in 
fact review the documents provided in accordance with AFI 36-
2910.  This AFI establishes a requirement for information that 
had not been considered previously.  This is not a mechanism to 
simply have a finding overturned.  The applicant did not provide 
new medical information that hadn't been previously reviewed and 
considered, and the decision was made to deny reinvestigation, 
also in accordance with the same AFI.  It is notable therefore 
that although a formal rendering was not made, the documents 
were in fact reviewed from the applicant’s medical unit, through 
the chain to the Air Force Reserve Vice Commander.  

The complete AFRC/SG evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In his response, the applicant reiterated his contentions and 
indicated that the AFRC/SG advisory contained incorrect 
statements.  

	a. A thorough review of his medical conditions and an 
extensive review of his case were not accomplished.  

	b. His squadron turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to the 
numerous reports and test results from his doctor which stated 
that his chronic sinusitis and chronic bronchitis was caused by 
his deployment exposure.  

	c. His email to CSAF was a request for personal attention to 
this matter as the principal military advisor and supervisor of 
the Air Force Reserve organizations as his case has been in 
process for six years due to numerous errors, lack of attention 
to detail, and an overall lack of competence and urgency by his 
squadron.  There was no complaint as insinuated by AFRC/SG.  

He requests the AFBCMR perform a meticulous and complete review 
of all medical documentation prior to making a decision and 
welcomes the opportunity to discuss this case with the AFBCMR to 
ensure all information has been presented and reviewed.  

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by 
existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.  

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  After a 
thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s 
submission, we believe that relief is warranted.  AFRC/SG 
pointed out that the applicant filed a total of seven LOD cases 
during 2005 through 2010.  Two of the cases were found in line 
of duty: Adenopathy secondary to a vaccination (Dec 2007) and 
Reactive Polyarthralgias (Nov 2008).  The applicant asked this 
Board to review and address two of the five cases where there 
was a finding not in the line of duty.  Specifically, this Board 
is reviewing the LOD case regarding chronic bronchitis and the 
case regarding chronic sinusitis, both of which the unit Medical 
Officer signed on May 22, 2008.  Based on his review of the 
applicant’s medical records including referral to a specialist 
in pulmonary disease, the unit Medical Officer reported the 
applicant had been “diagnosed with Asthmatic Bronchitis 
secondary to Anthrax vaccination.”  The Medical Officer, unit 
Commander, unit Staff Judge Advocate, and Appointing Authority 
concluded the applicant’s chronic bronchitis and sinusitis were 
in the line of duty and were not existing prior to service.  
Without explanation, rationale or supporting facts, the 
reviewing officials at Air Force Reserve Command announced a 
different, opposite finding.  They concluded the bronchitis and 
sinusitis were existing prior to service (EPTS).  Subsequently, 
the applicant’s pulmonary specialist found there is a direct 
causal relationship between the bronchitis and sinusitis and the 
applicant’s exposure to dust particles while overseas on active 
military duty.  The Board took note that the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility recommends denial.  However, there is no 
evidence in this record of pre-existing chronic sinusitis, 
chronic asthmatic bronchitis, or reactive airway dysfunction 
syndrome (RADS).  Absent such pre-existing evidence, and in 
light of the evidence that the sinusitis, bronchitis and RADS 
were caused by exposure to silica, the fact that the applicant 
first presented for treatment while serving a period of active 
service, is determinative that his conditions, as likely as not, 
occurred in line of duty.  We understand that the unit Medical 
Officer’s report that the bronchitis may have been “secondary 
to” vaccination may merely be a comment that the applicant’s 
immune system had been primed by the many vaccinations he 
received, particularly as confirmed by the LOD case in which 
Lymphadenopathy was found to have been secondary to vaccinations 
related to the overseas tour.  Thus, the comments about 
vaccination as a “secondary” cause are not inconsistent with the 
final diagnosis that silica was the “primary” cause of the 
bronchitis.  Based on the above, we recommend that the 
applicant’s record be corrected as indicated below.  

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 RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 
20 January 2009 his conditions of chronic sinusitis and chronic 
asthmatic bronchitis were found to be service-connected and 
incurred in the line of duty.  

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application 
in Executive Session on 5 March 2013, under the provisions of 
AFI 36-2603:

				, Panel Chair
				, Member
				, Member

The following documentary evidence was pertaining to AFBCMR 
Docket Number BC-2012-02590 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149 dated 11 June 2012 w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFRC/SG, dated 24 July 2012.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 August 2012.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 4 September 2012 
w/atchs.




                                   	
                                   Panel Chair