AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 98- 00765
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
J
-
$
;
;
;
+
'
e*.
p t 5
r- P- .1_
Applicant requests correction of fraudulent Clinical Record
prepared by Major A--- B--- .
Applicant's submission is at
Exhibit A.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request
and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the
application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D).
Applicant's responses to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E.
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the
available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of
error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and
opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the
evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by
applicant.
Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied
rights to which entitled, appropriate regulations were not
followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we find no
basis to disturb the existing record.
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and
will only be reconsidered upon the presentatjon of new relevant
evidence which was not reasonably available at the time the
application was filed.
Members of the Board Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Mr. Frederick R.
Beaman, 111, and Mr. Richard A. Peterson considered this
application on 12 January 1999 in accordance with the provisions
of Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and the governing statute, 10,
U.S.C. 1552.
Panel Chair
Exhibits :
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D.
E. Applicant's Responses
AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
FROM: BCMR Medical Consultant
1535 Command Drive, EE Wing, 3rd Floor
Andrews AFB MD 20762-7002
25June1998
98-00765
Filing of this request was not done In a timely manner as 23 years have passed since the
applicant was medically retired.
Applicant's entire case file has been reviewed and is forwarded with the following findings,
conclusions and recommendations.
REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant was placed on the TDRL on 11 March 1973 after
serving 3 years, 5 months, 21 days on active duty. He received a 70% disability rating for
schizophrenia. He applies now requesting removal or correction (exact request unclear) of a
medical summary prepared prior to his disability evaluation.
FACTS: The applicant was stationed in England for only a short while when he was
referred by his commander for a mental health evaluation because of behavior that was found
to be abnormal. He was hospitalized there and subsequently transferred to Wright-Patterson
AFB, Ohio for continued evaluation and treatment. His diagnosis of Chronic Undifferentiated
Schizophrenia was established there and a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) convened with
referral to the disability evaluation system. There the applicant was recommended for TDRL
with which he concurred. The applicant was duly retired, transferred to a DVA hospital for an
additional 2 weeks and then followed as an outpatient until February 1976 when he and his
mother decided he no longer needed to take the medicines he had been prescribed, and he
had no further mental health follow-up from then to the present. From the very start of his
TDRL placement, the applicant declined to appear for any scheduled periodic evaluations
required by law, and his retirement pay was stopped after the first such failure to appear. He
was removed from the TDRL without benefits at the 5-year maximum length on the TDRL when
he continued to not report for evaluations.
The applicant contends that the narrative summary prepared for the MEB was not truthful
and detrimental to his subsequent civilian life. In support of this, he provides a detailed version
of his and also his mother's recollection of events and discussions that occurred while he was
being evaluated for his disease, but offers no substantive evidence of any error in the
diagnosis, nor in the validity of his evaluation outcome.
DISCUSSION: The applicant offers no medical evidence to the contrary that his diagnosed
schizophrenia has ever been found unjustified. By failing to return for mandatory periodic
evaluations during his time on the TDRL, the applicant missed out on his right to contest any of
his medical history he felt was unjust or untruthful. At no time in the intervening 18 years from
his removal from the TDRL has he been seen by the DVA or other medical resources to
reevaluate his status or to contest the diagnosis. To now attempt, some 23 years later, to
Page 2
AFBCMR Case #98-00765
change a record based on personal recall of perceived events and discussions he held with his
treating physician, during a time when he admits to “how ill I was,” is not supported by evidence
of record. While some minor details (such as mother’s exact age to the month when the
applicant was born-35 years v. 34 years and 8 months) may not be strictly correct, the intent
and content of the summary are found in keeping with such documents and cannot be
corrected as the applicant wishes. Without documented evidence to the contrary, the validity of
this medical summary must be accepted.
RECOMMENDATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in
the records is warranted and the application should be denied.
F
FREDERICK W. HORNICK, Col., USAF, MC, FS
Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR
Medical Advisor SAF Personnel Council
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00683
At the time of removal from the TDRL, the IPEB determined that the evidence of the medical evaluation warranted a rating less than 30 percent and, with his concurrence, the applicant was discharged with severance pay in accordance with law and DOD policy. A service medical record entry after the PEB recommending placement on the TDRL but before the effective date and separation from active duty dated 20 October 1994 indicates the applicant was doing well without symptoms while on...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C ) . Officials within the office of the Secretary of the Air Force reviewed the case file and directed that the applicant be discharged with severance pay and given a 20 percent compensable rating. The disability laws of Title 10, USC require the military services to rate disabilities based on their current condition, at the time...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). No such evidence is found in this record, and, therefore, the applicant’s request for a disability discharge cannot be granted. RECOMMENDATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant’s request for a medical disability discharge is not supported by evidence of records and his request should, therefore, be denied.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03284
On 15 Dec 63, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Counsel (SAFPC) reviewed his rebuttal to the FPEB findings and concurred with the IPEB's recommendation. The VA disability rating code initially utilized in 1963 by the PEB was reportedly 9203, indicating "Schizophrenia, paranoid type," and VA rating code 9208 was utilized in the final PEB action, depicting a "Delusional Disorder." The complete BCMR Medical Consultant's evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02742
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2003-02742 INDEX CODE 108.01 108.10 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be given a medical discharge/retirement for service-connected pain in his back, shoulder, and neck, and numbness in his right hand. The DVA concluded the evidence did not show his right ear perforation continued to cause...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02236
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical records and states that the applicant’s condition of cognitive impairment is permanent, but is not judged to be stable, and does not meet or exceed a disability rating of 80 percent. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1996-02869A
Applicant’s complete statement, with attachment, is at Exhibit F. ___________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Medical Consultant, BCMR, reviewed applicant’s most recent submission and opined that no change in the records is warranted and the application should be denied. From evidence presented both at removal from the TDRL and current examinations, the applicant’s physical disability clearly does not warrant a change in...
Applicant’s complete statement, with attachment, is at Exhibit F. ___________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Medical Consultant, BCMR, reviewed applicant’s most recent submission and opined that no change in the records is warranted and the application should be denied. From evidence presented both at removal from the TDRL and current examinations, the applicant’s physical disability clearly does not warrant a change in...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00990
The evidence supports that both Delusional Disorder and PTSD were present, unfitting and compensable at the time the applicant was placed on the TDRL. The Air Force disability boards must rate disabilities based on the member's condition at the time of evaluation. The complete Medical Consultants evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Regarding the diagnosis of PTSD, counsel states that no...