You mean the information on the request form? That form is designed to request a copy of a record, not to request verification of the record's facts--Bennett just wrote in "verification in lieu of cc." If someone was asking for a "certified copy of a birth record"--the standard use for that form--they'd be providing the info to identify the form, not info they want verified.
Besides, all that info is on the COLB. If Onaka verifies that the info on the COLB matches their records, isn't he also de facto verifying that the info on the request form matches their records? So once again, how would he verify the info on the request form beyond verifying that it matched their records?
The HDOH website says that the procedure for getting a letter of verification is the same as for getting a certified copy, and links to the application form. They also say that a request for verification has to be done via snail-mail or in person.
Whether information matches their records legally means nothing if their record is non-valid. What’s the legal use of information matching a non-valid record? Saying that it matches proves nothing, unless it is somewhere specifically stated that the record it matches is legally valid. That has never been said. And the 1960-64 birth index has been specifically altered to include non-valid records, so the birth index also proves nothing about the validity of the record - and actually RAISES suspicions.
But the way a verification is done is that a person submits the information to be verified, and Onaka writes a letter of verification repeating back the facts that he verifies as true. Anything he doesn’t repeat back on his letter is what they can’t verify because it is not claimed on a legally valid record.
So him not verifying a submitted fact is a big deal. The statute requires Onaka to verify ANY information submitted, if he can certify that it is the way the even actually happened (which is the case if the record is legally valid/prima facia evidence).
The only reason for Onaka to verify the birth city as Honolulu but NOT verify the birth island as Oahu is if he can’t certify that Obama who was born in Honolulu was born on the island of Oahu. He already verified that all the claims actually on the White House image are also on the record they have, so why would he be able to verify Honolulu but not be able to verify Oahu? The logical explanation is that he is not actually verifying Honolulu as the place of birth but just that Honolulu is INDICATED (claimed) on the BC whose existence he is verifying (which is also what the grammatics of his sentence says....)
I forgot to answer your last question. This is how Onaka would verify the truth of submitted claims - without any references to anything “matching” anything:
I, Alvin Onaka, pursuant to HRS 338-14.3 verify that the Hawaii Department of Health has on record a birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama.
I verify that Barack Hussein Obama, II, male, was born on Aug 4, 1961, in Honolulu on the island of Oahu, to mother Stanley Ann Dunham and father Barack Hussein Obama.
In addition, I verify that the following facts from the birth certificate reflect the true circumstances of the birth event:
1. Hospital: Kapiolani (blah, blah, blah.....)
I also verify that the Certificate of Live Birth posted on the White House website at (blah blah blah) is a true and accurate representation of the original record on file.