Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801275
Original file (9801275.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-01275
            INDEX CODE:  136.00
       (Deceased)      COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her late husband’s records be corrected  to  reflect  he  was  retired
after 20 years of service and she receive his retired pay.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons applicant believes she has been the  victim  of  an  error
and/or an injustice are contained in her complete submission, which is
at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Relevant facts pertaining to  this  application,  extracted  from  the
deceased member’s military  records,  are  contained  in  the  letters
prepared by the appropriate offices of the  Air  Force.   Accordingly,
there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Director, Health Services Individual Reserve Programs, HQ ARPC/SG,
reviewed this appeal and recommends denial because the separation  was
for just cause.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 3 August 1998 for review and comment within 30 days.  The
applicant’s daughter requested an extension  via  electronic  mailgram
(EMail) dated 14 September 1998. On  15  September  1998,  the  AFBCMR
Staff granted an extension up to 15 October 1998. As of this date,  no
response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Acting Director, Health Services Individual Reserve  Programs,  HQ
ARPC/SG again reviewed the appeal and  provided  an  analysis  of  the
case.  Using  current  Department  of  Defense  guidance  and  medical
standards,  AFI  48-123  still  lists  diabetes  as  a   disqualifying
condition. The Acting Director recommends the application be denied.

A complete copy of the additional evaluation is at Exhibit E.

The Chief, Retirements/Separations Division, HQ ARPC/DPA, explains the
eligibility for Reserve retired pay under the provisions of Title  10,
USC, Section 12731. While the  deceased  member’s  military  personnel
record indicates he completed 19 years,  10  months  and  19  days  of
honorable Federal service, only 17 years, 10 months, and  19  days  of
this time is  satisfactory  service.   The  deceased  member  was  not
eligible for Reserve retired pay under  Section  12731.  Further,  the
Section 12731a, Temporary Special Retirement Qualification  Authority,
became effective on 5 October  1994;  therefore,  the  applicant,  who
separated on 30 June 1962, is not entitled to retire under  this  law.
Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the additional evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL EVALUATIONS:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 28 March 1999 for review  and  comment  within  30  days.
Apparently the applicant’s daughter wrote to her Senator on 12 January
1999 and the applicant wrote to the same Senator on 27  January  1999.
The Senator forwarded these letters to the Office of the Secretary  of
the Air Force, Legislative Affairs (SAF/LLI), who  in  turn  forwarded
them to the AFBCMR’s intake office at Randolph AFB.

The letters to the Senator are at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  After a thorough review
of the evidence of record  and  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded that her late husband’s records should be altered. Her  late
husband had only 17 years, 10 months,  and  19  days  of  satisfactory
Federal service credible towards retirement and he therefore  was  not
eligible  for  retirement  benefits.  Section  12731a  made  medically
discharged Reservists with at least 15 years of  satisfactory  service
eligible for retirement pay;  however, it  did  not  become  effective
until almost 32 years after the decedent was discharged. The applicant
has not provided persuasive evidence to substantiate  her  allegations
that her late husband was  improperly  discharged  for  DM.  While  we
sympathize with her loss and acknowledge her difficult  circumstances,
the available evidence does not provide a compelling basis for  us  to
recommend relief.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  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 15 June 1999 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair
                 Dr. Gerald B. Kauvar, Member
                 Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 May 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ ARPC/SG, dated 13 Jul 98.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Aug 98.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ ARPC/SG, dated 14 Jan 99.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, HQ ARPC/DPA, dated 23 Mar 99, w/atchs.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Mar 99.
   Exhibit H.  Letters, Applicant, dated 15 Jan & 11 Feb 99.




                                   VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100963

    Original file (0100963.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Director of Personnel Program Management, ARPC/DPP, reviewed the application and states that in accordance with Title 10 USC, Section 12731, in order for a service member to be eligible for retired Reserve pay, the service member must complete at least 20 years of satisfactory service with the last six years of service in a Reserve component. In reviewing the service member's record he had over 19...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801209

    Original file (9801209.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC AUG 2 5 1998 Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98-01209 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code, Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records is announced, and it is directed that: the Department of the Air Force relating to orrected to show...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801709

    Original file (9801709.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her deceased husband planned to take his Air Force retirement at age 60. 6 98-01709 On 28 December 1981, ARPC/DPAAR notified the spouse of the deceased member that an RCSBP election had not been received by the deadline and informed her that RCSBP coverage was not in effect and no further election could be made until the member reached age 60. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00256

    Original file (BC-1998-00256.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00256 INDEX CODE 136.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her time spent on the Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL) [1 year, 5 months, 26 days] be credited towards her total active federal military service date (TAFMSD) for retirement purposes. Time spent on the TDRL is considered a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800256

    Original file (9800256.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00256 INDEX CODE 136.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her time spent on the Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL) [1 year, 5 months, 26 days] be credited towards her total active federal military service date (TAFMSD) for retirement purposes. Time spent on the TDRL is considered a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802277

    Original file (9802277.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02277 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be considered for promotion to the Reserve grade of Colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Fiscal Year 1998 (FY98) Reserve of the Air Force Colonel Selection Board. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-01034A

    Original file (BC-1997-01034A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since there was no provision of law that permits receipt of retired pay unless this requirement has been met, the Board agreed with the Air Force evaluation and found no basis to recommend granting the relief sought. A copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit F. Applicant, with counsel, has submitted an application, dated 16 June 1998, requesting reconsideration of his earlier request to grant an additional two years of Reserve service to be eligible to receive Reserve...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9701034A

    Original file (9701034A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since there was no provision of law that permits receipt of retired pay unless this requirement has been met, the Board agreed with the Air Force evaluation and found no basis to recommend granting the relief sought. A copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit F. Applicant, with counsel, has submitted an application, dated 16 June 1998, requesting reconsideration of his earlier request to grant an additional two years of Reserve service to be eligible to receive Reserve...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02922

    Original file (BC-2002-02922.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, the majority of the Board is not persuaded that deceased member’s records should be altered so that she would receive an SBP annuity. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. A majority found that applicant had not provided sufficient evidence of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | 0201784

    Original file (0201784.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION: Applicant’s counsel provided a response to the Air Force evaluation, which included another letter from the applicant, her son-in-law and a friend of the deceased military member. 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...