RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02656
INDEX CODES: 108.00, 137.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Applicant is the widow of a former member of the Air National Guard
who requests that the former service member’s records be reviewed for
consideration for disability retirement in accordance with Title 10,
Section 653, Disability Retirement or Separation for Certain Members
with Pre-Existing Conditions
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or
unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the
letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force.
Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of
Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, reviewed this application and
recommended denial. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit
C.
The Physical Disability Division, AFPC/DPPD, reviewed this application
and recommended denial. A complete copy of the evaluation is at
Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and furnished a response which
is attached at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law
or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice regarding the applicant’s
request that her late husband records be considered for a disability
retirement. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in
judging the merits of the case. However, we did not find it
sufficient to override the rationale provided by the Air Force offices
of primary responsibility (OPRs). Therefore, in the absence of
evidence that the former service member was unfit to perform the
duties of his rank and office, within the meaning of the law, we
conclude that no basis exists to recommend favorable action on the
applicant’s request.
4. Notwithstanding the above, a majority of the Board noted that the
former service member expired following a fatal heart attack after
having completing over 19 years of creditable service for retirement.
The Board majority opines that, in all likelihood, he would have
continued to serve until he was eligible for retirement and would have
probably elected a survivor annuity for the applicant. In view of the
fact that the member was only months away from being eligible for a
length of service retirement, and in recognition of his sustained
dedication to the service of his country, the Board majority believes
that it would be in the interest of justice to correct the records to
effect such relief. Accordingly, a majority of the Board recommends
that the former service member’s records be corrected as indicated
below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to the FORMER SERVICE MEMBER, be corrected to show that:
a. He was credited 35 nonpaid inactive duty points and
15 membership points during the retirement/retention year 14 October
1975 through 13 October 1976, resulting in 50 total points; and, that
the period 14 October 1975 through 13 October 1976 is a year of
satisfactory Federal service for retirement.
b. On 8 November 1997, he elected full, immediate coverage for
spouse (Option CA) in the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan
(SBP).
c. Effective 8 November 1997, he assigned to the Retired
Reserve Section awaiting pay at age 60.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 10 Jan 01, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Teddy L. Houston, Panel Chair
Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Member
By majority vote, the Board voted to correct the records, as
recommended. Mr. Dunn voted to deny relief but does not wish to
submit a minority report. All members voted to correct the records,
as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Sep 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, Medical Consultant, dated 30 Oct 00.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 8 Nov 00.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 22 Nov 00.
Exhibit F. Letter, applicant, dated 15 Dec 00, w/atchs.
TEDDY L. HOUSTON
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 00-02656
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to, 210-38-4891, be corrected to show that:
a. He was credited 35 nonpaid inactive duty points and
15 membership points during the retirement/retention year 14 October
1975 through 13 October 1976, resulting in 50 total points; and, that
the period 14 October 1975 through 13 October 1976 is a year of
satisfactory Federal service for retirement.
b. On 8 November 1997, he elected full, immediate
coverage for spouse (Option CA) in the Reserve Component Survivor
Benefit Plan (SBP).
c. Effective 8 November 1997, he assigned to the Retired
Reserve Section awaiting pay at age 60.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
Following a break in service, he enlisted in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of staff sergeant on 11 January 1973 for a period of three (3) years under the Air Reserve Technician (ART) Program. In a message dated 16 January 1981, personnel at the applicant’s unit indicated that his transfer to the Retired Reserve had been delayed to allow the applicant to accrue sufficient points to be credited with his 20th good year. In view of the foregoing, and because we are convinced by the...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, reviewed this application and states that he is of the opinion that no change in the records is warranted and the application should be denied. We recognize that final disposition of a disability case is based on a “snapshot in time;” however, we believe that her cognitive disorder condition was of such a progressive nature that a true picture of her condition was...
Ltr, AFBCMR, dtd Aug 10, 00 4. Ltr, applicant, dtd Nov 2, 00, w/atchs AFBCMR 95-02481 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 pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to , be corrected...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should have received an honorable discharge for medical disability because of his medical condition. On 6 May 1997, The Report of Medical History shows indication of depression and that the applicant was taking an anti-depressant medication. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant, reviewed this application and states that...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial. She concluded that she was in good health before receiving the fourth anthrax vaccine, after the fourth vaccine she became extremely ill, she is to this day suffering side effects from the vaccine, and there are no studies of the long-term adverse health effects. ...
In DPPD’s view, the applicant has not submitted any material or documentation to show he was improperly rated or processed under the provisions of the military disability laws and policy at the time of his permanent disability retirement. Accordingly, a majority of the Board finds no basis to recommend favorable action on the applicant’s requests. A majority found that applicant had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice regarding the applicant’s requests that the Article...
AFBCMR 00-02750 INDEX CODE: 137.00 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36- 2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying Memorandum for the Chief...
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the limited documentation which was available, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision. Members of the Board Mr. Teddy L. Houston, Mr. Grover L. Dunn, and Ms. Marilyn Thomas considered this application on 10 Jan 01 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant and counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Applicant's response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action.