RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02880 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

He receive [service] credit for five years on the Temporary 
Disability Retired List (TDRL) and be promoted to the grade of 
Brigadier General (BG), 0-7. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He should have been notified of the Medical Evaluation Board 
(MEB) proceedings; he was also unaware that a Physical 
Evaluation Board (PEB) was conducted. 

 

The Mississippi Air National Guard falsely accused him of flying 
without waivers for medical problems and awaiting arrest for a 
crime. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant served in the Mississippi Air National Guard in 
the grade of Colonel (O-6) during the matter under review. 

 

On 16 Oct 06, the applicant was relieved from active duty and 
permanently retired for physical disability with a combined 
compensable disability rating of 70 percent, effective 17 Oct 
06. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of 
primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and 
E. 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 


AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

NGB-GO recommends denial of the applicant’s request for 
advancement to the grade of O-7, indicating their office has no 
record of him having been nominated for, or meeting, a General 
Officer Federal Recognition Board (GOFRB) to serve in said 
grade. 

 

A complete copy of the NGB-GO evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

NGB/A1PS recommends denial, indicating the applicant has not 
provided adequate supporting documentation to support his 
request. Therefore, his request should be forwarded to 
AFPC/DPFDD for their recommendation. 

 

A complete copy of the NGB/A1PS evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

AFPC/DPFD recommends denial, indicating, there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice with respect to the applicant’s disability 
processing. The applicant’s request for more active service 
time is not warranted. Time spent of the TDRL does not count 
toward active service; it constitutes retired time. 
Furthermore, the evidence of record indicates the applicant was 
never on the TDRL, but was permanently retired for physical 
disability. On 25 May 07 [sic], the Informal Physical 
Evaluation Board (IPEB) recommended the applicant be permanently 
retired with a combined disability rating of 60 percent. On 
9 Jun 06, the applicant appealed the IPEB determination and 
requested a formal hearing with counsel. On 3 Aug 06, the 
Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) reviewed the case file 
and awarded the applicant a combined compensable disability 
rating of 70 percent. His conditions were considered Combat 
Related. On 3 Aug 06, he non-concurred with the FPEB but 
elected not to submit a rebuttal for review by the Secretary of 
the Air Force Personnel Council. On 15 Aug 06, he was issued 
his retirement order with a 17 Oct 06 effective retirement date. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit E. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 17 Feb 13 for review and comment within 30 days. 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit F). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and 
recommendations of AFPC/DPFD and NGB-GO and adopt their 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not 
been the victim of an error or injustice. Other than his own 
uncorroborated assertions, the applicant has provided no 
evidence that would convince us he has 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 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-2012-02880 in Executive Session on 2 Apr 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Jun 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, NGB-GO, dated 5 Dec 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 13 Dec 12. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dated 16 Jan 13. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Feb 13. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair