RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00209
INDEX CODE: 134.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The Standard Form 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care form, dated 24
Feb 09, and other medical documentation mentioning “OPIOID DEPENDENCY” be
removed from his records.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
During his second week of basic training, he made a false statement
regarding his use of drugs. He was scared, depressed and experienced many
emotions; therefore, he believed his statement would allow him to be
discharged. He told his sergeant that he spent time in a drug rehab center
and was instructed to report to Behavioral Assessment Services (BAS) for a
mental evaluation. He lied when asked about the drugs he had used and his
length of time spent in the drug rehab. The physician knew he was lying
and counseled him. He was punished for lying but was not discharged from
service. He was also removed from combat control school.
He is very sorry for the false statement he made regarding his use of
drugs. His actions were cowardly and based on emotions. He has learned to
love the Air Force. His medical records; however, still contain false
“OPIOID DEPENDENCY” statements which he would like removed.
In support of his request, the applicant submits copies of medical reports.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Information extracted from the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS)
indicates the applicant is currently assigned duties as a Vehicle
Operations Apprentice in the grade of senior airman having assumed that
grade effective and with a date of rank of 6 Nov 09.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from
the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by
the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFMOA/SGAT cannot recommend denial or grant of the applicant’s request.
However, SGAT recommends requesting authorization from the applicant to
access the Pharmacy Data Transaction Service data base and the urine drug
test data base to determine if there is any data to support the repeated
use of Opioids.
SGAT notes the medical documentation provided by the applicant exhibits
several encounters where the providers annotated either a history of
withdrawal from pain medication, a history of an addiction to Tylenol
w/Codeine, or a history of opioid dependency in remission. However, there
was no documentation found where a provider actually diagnosed the
applicant with opioid dependency. Additionally, the diagnosis of ‘Opioid
Dependency, in Remission” was repeatedly noted throughout subsequent visits
from Jul 07 through Oct 09 as an “AutoCite” feature found in the Department
of Defense electronic medical records without substantiating history to
support this diagnosis. SGAT states encounters after 2 Oct 09 did not
include this diagnosis in the “AutoCite” section.
The complete SGAT evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 27 Aug
10, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office
has received no response (Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. The applicant’s contentions are duly
noted; however, existing laws and/or regulations indicate he may obtain the
relief he seeks by requesting his Primary Care Manager (PCM) remove the
references to Opiods from his medical records. 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.
Therefore, in view of the aforementioned, we find no basis upon which to
recommend granting the relief sought in this case.
_______________________________________________________________
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 BC-2010-00209 in
Executive Session on 28 Oct 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Jan 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFMOA/SGAT, dated 20 Aug 10.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Aug 10.
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 | CY2009 | BC-2009-00280
The applicants medical records are filed with the VA office. The DD Form 2697 in his medical records is not available. 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01939
Defective distant vision acuity diagnosis 13 June 1967. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that: 1. His Standard Form 93, Report of Medical History, dated 24 November 1987, be amended in Item 25, Physicians summary and elaboration of all pertinent data to reflect the following notes: Defective distant vision acuity diagnosis...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03448
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2012- 03448 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Flying Class I (FCI) physical, dated 27 November 2006, be corrected or removed from his record. During his FCI physical, he passed the color vision exam required of all FCI, FCIA, and FCIII applicants. The complete SGAT evaluation is at...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01514
On 3 Feb 11, the IPEB diagnosed the applicant with TOS, left upper extremity with a 60% compensable disability rating and disposition to retain on the TDRL. The complete PDBR 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 11 Apr 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the...
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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-00680
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00680 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Additionally, they recommend approval of the applicants request to have the word "Vietnam" replaced with "Gulfport, Mississippi" on the Standard Form (SF) 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 4 Apr 86. ...
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...