RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03985 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Standard Form (SF) 88, Report of Medical Examination, and SF 93, Report of Medical History, both dated 2 Oct 73, be removed from his records. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The SF 88 and SF 93 in his official records were falsified and placed in his records while he was still in Thailand. He was not allowed to complete a report of medical history or provided a separation exam. His name is misspelled on the SF 93 and he did not sign the form. The false documents were placed in his records six months prior to his actual separation. He has been denied compensation by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) due to the false, forged, and libelous documents. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 4 May 70, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the Regular Air Force as a vehicle operator. On 5 Aug 70, the applicant reported and was treated for back pain. On 5 Oct 70, the applicant was prohibited from doing heavy lifting due to recurrent back pain. On 14 Oct 70, the applicant was medically disqualified as a Special Purpose Vehicle Repairman due to recurring back strain and approved for cross training. The applicant’s performance reports reflect he was stationed at U-Tapo Airfield, Thailand during the period 7 Sep 72 through 13 Feb 74. On 6 Jan 73, the applicant was prohibited from prolonged standing and driving until 11 Jan 73. The applicant was restricted from driving from 31 Jan 73 through 1 Apr 73. The contested SF 88 and SF 93, both dated 2 Oct 73, reflect the applicant had occasional back pain and a history of back pain, respectively. On 5 Nov 73, the applicant was placed on administrative hold as a possible witness for a civilian court case. On 6 Apr 74, the applicant was released from active duty at the completion of his required active service with said service characterized as honorable. According to documentation provided by the applicant, the DVA has repeatedly denied his requests for disability compensation related to his back pain due to no evidence of a service connection for back pain. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFMOA/SGH recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The applicant’s Report of Medical History and Report of Medical Examination were completed on 2 Oct 73, with the medical history being signed by the applicant. His date eligible for return from overseas (DEROS) was 11 Nov 73; however, he was placed on administrative hold on 5 Nov 73 as a possible witness to a civil court case. In addition, there is no available documentation showing any other examination occurred prior to his separation. A complete copy of the AFMOS/SGH evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He reiterates he was not given a separation examination or the opportunity to complete a report of medical history. These false forms were placed in his records prior to his DEROS and release from active duty. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ 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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission, to include his rebuttal response, 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, other than his own assertions, he has provided no evidence that would lead us to believe the contested documents were falsified as he contends or executed in violation of established procedure. While it appears that the forms in question were executed several months prior to his ultimate date of separation, the applicant has produced no evidence that would convince us, forty years after the events in question, that he was denied rights to which he was entitled. 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 the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2012-03985 in Executive Session on 14 May 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-03985 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFMOA/SGH, dated 28 Feb 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Mar 13. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 2 Apr 13, w/atchs.