RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02735
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Bipolar diagnosis be removed from his medical records.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
In Nov 11 [sic], while assigned to Wilford Hall for medical
treatment, he was diagnosed with a Bipolar disorder. He was not
administered a psychology test for a proper diagnosis. Two
different providers administered him psychology tests and he
passed both tests. 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 applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the grade of staff
sergeant.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFMOA/SGAT recommends denial. On 16 Jul 10, the Aeromedical
Consult Service (ACS) permanently disqualified the applicant for
Flying Class II duties due to a Mood Disorder. SGAT notes two
physicians opined that it was not possible to look back in
retrospect and state that a manic or a psychotic episode did not
occur. On 15 May 12, the case was referred back to ACS and
reviewed by a neuropsychologist who discussed the case in detail
with the entire Neuropsychiatry branch. He concluded that there
was no medical evidence to reverse the 2010 ACS opinion. The Air
Force Psychiatry Consult reviewed the applicants request and
supporting documentation and agreed with the findings of the ACS.
The complete SGAT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 20 Aug 12, 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 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 applicants complete submission in judging the merits of
the case; however, we agree with AFMOA/SGATs opinion and
recommendation and adopt their rationale as the basis for our
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error
or injustice. While the applicant contends he was certified to
return to duty with all restrictions and holds removed, we note
the Aeromedical Summary dated 1 Dec 11, indicates the requested
waiver to allow him continued participation in static line
parachute duties was denied and he was permanently disqualified
for Flying Class duties. In addition, we note he remained
disqualified after his flying Physical Health Assessment (PHA)
performed on 11 Oct 11. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to
the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief
sought in this application.
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 issue(s)
involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably
considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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 this application in
Executive Session on 9 Apr 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
,Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2012-02735:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Jun 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFMOA/SGAT, dated 10 Aug 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Aug 12.
Exhibit D. Minority Report, dated 12 Apr 13.
Panel Chair
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...
During the contested time period, a Safety Investigation Board (SIB) was conducted to investigate a mishap on 24 February 1999 involving an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) in Kuwait in which the applicant was the mishap pilot. They have difficulty seeing how a Safety Investigation Board (SIB) or SIB investigation can be construed as personal to the applicant or related to his own military records. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01757
The IPEB reviewed his case and found the member fit and recommended, "Return to Duty." BCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and stated he sought a second opinion by pulmonologist in December 2005 and was diagnosed with asthma after having below normal pulmonary function tests. In this respect, the Board notes...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2006-01757
The IPEB reviewed his case and found the member fit and recommended, "Return to Duty." BCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and stated he sought a second opinion by pulmonologist in December 2005 and was diagnosed with asthma after having below normal pulmonary function tests. In this respect, the Board notes...
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 | CY2006 | BC-2005-03755
The Air Force Medical Service position, as stated in a letter dated 25 Jun 03, was that testing was not considered disqualifying in and of itself. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response to the Air Force evaluations, the applicant notes that AFI 48-123 disqualifies flyers from flying duty with a personal or family history of Huntington’s Chorea and that a waiver may...
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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-03406
It was recommended that he be placed on the TDRL with a disability rating of 30%. There is no information provided that indicates that his condition was not completely controlled with medication and has not stabilized after the Apr 02 episode. In the applicant’s case, the IPEB determined a zero percent rating was appropriate due to his full remission on medicated state at the time of his reevaluation.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00572
On 28 October 2003, the Credentials Function met and recommended the applicant’s privileges be restricted. AFPC/DPPPE complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and stated she never received any letters of reprimand or counseling to justify the marks on that referral OPR. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01790
By memorandum dated 5 Apr 03, the applicant amended the above request to request that the Board approve replacement of his original PRFs with revised PRFs, signed by his senior rater, for the Calendar Year (CY) 1999B (99B) and CY00A Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards. Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the evaluations prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force found at Exhibits C, D, and...