RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00280
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His DD Form 2697, Report of Medical Assessment, be replaced with
the signed copy.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He had been seen by several different doctors depending on the
medical issue. It was not unusual to have medical records at
different locations due to being seen by specialty clinics. He has
the dated version of the DD Form 2697, and filed a claim with the
Veterans Affairs (VA), but could not get them to accept the form.
The VA will not honor his copy of the DD Form 2697 as they believe
it to be a forged document. He believes the outcome of his claim
would have been different had they accepted his version of the
form.
In support of his request, applicant provides a copy of a signed
DD Form 2697.
His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 28 Aug 92. He
was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant, having
assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Dec 99.
He received an honorable discharge after serving on active duty for
9 years, 11 months, and 8 days.
The applicants medical records are filed with the VA office. The
DD Form 2697 in his medical records is not available.
A request for records was sent to the applicant on 30 Apr 09;
however, as of 28 Jan 10, the applicant has not responded.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFMOA/SGAT recommends denial. SGAT states the applicants request
is untimely due to his medical records being out of the Air Forces
control for so many years. The governing regulation provides
specific instructions to correct erroneous data in a medical
record; however, he has not provided any supporting documentation
to show which copy is the actual correct copy. In addition, the
originating practitioner is no longer available to question.
The SGAT complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 31 Dec 09 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, this office has received no response.
___________________________________________________________________
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. Therefore, in the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2009-00280 in Executive Session on 24 Feb 10, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Jan 09, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFMOA/SGAT, dated 22 Dec 09.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Dec 09.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2009 01040
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01040 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-01040
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01040 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 02735
A Medical Evaluation Board concluded the Bipolar diagnosis was improper and suggested he may have experienced a brief psychotic episode. On 6 Sep 11, he was certified to return to duty and all restrictions have been removed. The Air Force Psychiatry Consult reviewed the applicants request and supporting documentation and agreed with the findings of the ACS. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00209
He lied when asked about the drugs he had used and his length of time spent in the drug rehab. His medical records; however, still contain false “OPIOID DEPENDENCY” statements which he would like removed. The recommendation provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility is duly noted; however, we find the applicant has not exhausted all of his administrative remedies.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02895
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02895 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be amended to reflect an injury he received during his military service. Without the supporting medical record documentation from the date of the applicants self-reported injury on 20 April 1996 through 31 May 1996, they are unable...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 00771
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00771 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The applicant also requests that his civilian treatment records from Good Samaritan Hospital be filed in his master personnel records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 May 12.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02462
SGAT states the available medical document on 16 September 1979 reflected the injury occurred on the right ankle. The complete AFMOA/SGAT evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates his contentions and further states he notes the 27 September follow-up exam indicated his right ankle had no fracture and normal range of motion, but it was not possible for his ankle that was...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01522
The applicant did not provide any documentation to show the performance report and developmental counseling were tainted. The complete NGB/A1PS evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates that all of the contested actions were tainted in reprisal for his protected communications. In this respect, we note the DOD/IG report, dated 16 Feb 12, indicates the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00642
During his medical evaluation, the doctor wrote Sustain back injury in flight. He was notified in the same letter that his request for CRSC for his condition of the skeletal system (right knee) and degenerative arthritis of the spine (cervical and lumbar) was denied because his claim did not reference the cause of his right knee condition and how it met the guidelines for CRSC; and his neck and back injury did not contain definitive evidence to confirm his disabilities were the direct...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00233
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement and his medical records. The documentation the applicant requests be removed from his records does not exist. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered BCMR Docket Number BC-2012-00233 in Executive Session on 30 August 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Jan 11, w/atchs.