Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02049
Original file (BC-2004-02049.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02049
                       INDEX CODE:  107.00
                       COUNSEL:  None

                       HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active  Duty
be corrected to reflect the date she was discharged as 10 August 1996.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her DD Form 214 reflects she was retired on 4 October 1994,  the  date
she was placed  on  the  Temporary  Disability  Retired  List  (TDRL).
However, her DD Form 256AF reflects she was  discharged  on  10 August
1996.  This creates a problem when potential employers  inquire  about
her discharge date.

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  (RegAF)  on  18 July
1984, as an airman basic for a period of four years.

The applicant underwent a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB)  on  31 March
1994 and was diagnosed with chronic myofascial pain, plantar  surface,
both  feet,  right  greater  than  left,  etiology  unknown,  probably
mechanical in etiology; bilateral hallux  valgus,  status  post  (S/P)
bilateral  chevron  osteotomies  with  marked  relief  of  pain,  with
residual intermittent discomfort on the  first  metatarsal  phalangeal
(MTP) joints, congenitally short fourth  toe  secondary  to  a  Brachy
metatarsus, Neuropraxia  of  the  posterior  tibial  nerve.   The  MEB
referred the applicant’s case to the Physical Evaluation Board  (PEB).
The PEB recommended the applicant be permanently retired (PDR) with  a
30  percent  disability  rating.   On  1  June  1994,  the   applicant
nonconcurred with the recommendation of the PEB.  The applicant’s case
was forwarded to the Formal  Physical  Evaluation  Board  (FPEB).   On
13 July 1994, the FPEB determined the applicant would be placed on the
Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) with a 50 percent  disability
rating for Chronic pain, both  feet,  right  greater  than  left,  S/P
February 1993 bilateral Chevron osteotomies, with the right side  pain
compatible  with  neuropraxia  of  posterior  tibial  nerve,  but  had
radiculopathy, right lower extremity.  On 13 July 1994, the  applicant
concurred with the findings of the FPEB.

On 3 October 1994, the applicant was released  from  active  duty  and
placed on the TDRL with a 50 percent disability  rating  on  4 October
1994, in accordance with AFI 36-3212.  She served 10 years,  2  months
and 16 days of active duty service.  The applicant  underwent  a  TDRL
reevaluation on 30 April 1996 and it  was  recommended  the  applicant
remain in a retired status.  On 17 May 1996, the applicant’s case  was
forwarded to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board  (IPEB)  and  they
recommended the applicant be discharged with severance pay with  a  20
percent disability rating.  On 14 June 1996, the  applicant  disagreed
with the findings of the PEB.  On 2 July 1996,  the  applicant’s  case
was forwarded to the Secretary of  the  Air  Force  Personnel  Council
(SAFPC) for a final determination of her case.  On 23 July  1996,  the
SAFPC directed the applicant be discharged and receive  severance  pay
with a 20 percent disability rating.  Special Order ACD-1696, dated 30
July 1996, credits her with  10  years,  2  months  and  16  days  for
severance pay and 12 years, 9 months and 17 days for basic pay.  On  9
August 1996, the applicant was removed from the TDRL and on  10 August
1996, she was discharged with entitlement to severance pay with  a  20
percent disability rating.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPD states the purpose of the military disability  evaluation
system (DES) is to maintain a fit and vital  force  by  separating  or
retiring members who are unable to perform the duties of their office,
grade, rank or rating.  The members who are separated or  retired  for
reason of a physical disability may be eligible for certain disability
compensation.  The Medical Evaluation Board (MEB)  determines  if  the
servicemember should be processed through the DES  when  a  member  is
determined to be disqualified for  continued  military  service.   The
medical  treatment  facility  that  provides  health   care   to   the
sevicemember makes the decision whether or not to conduct an MEB.

HQ AFPC/DPPD further states Item 12 (Record of Service) of the DD Form
214 annotates period of service the  servicemember  has  served.   The
time the servicemember is assigned on the TDRL is in a retired  status
and is not creditable for basic pay computation when the servicemember
is discharged with entitlement to severance pay.

A review of the applicant’s military personnel records did not  reveal
any errors on the DD  Form  214,  which  would  warrant  changing  her
release from active duty date.  Therefore, based  on  the  information
provided, DPPD recommends denying the applicant's requests.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
16 July 2004, for review and response.  As of this date,  no  response
has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 are not persuaded her time on the TDRL should be  credited
as active  duty  time,  thereby  changing  her  discharge  date.   The
applicant was released from active duty and placed on the  TDRL.   She
was removed from the TDRL and separated with disability severance pay.
 As noted by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, the  time
spent on the TDRL is not creditable for active duty service.  However,
the time spent on the TDRL is creditable  for  basic  pay  computation
when  the  servicemember  is  being  discharged  with  entitlement  to
severance pay.  The applicant’s DD Form 214  accurately  reflects  her
time spent on active duty.  In  view  of  the  foregoing  and  in  the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no  compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-02049  in  Executive  Session  on  6  October  2004,  under   the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
                       Mr. Albert C. Ellett, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Jun 04, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant’s Military Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPD, dated 12 Jul 04.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Jul 04.




                             CHARLES E. BENNETT
                             Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9700922

    Original file (9700922.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    c L/ Director Air Force AIR FORCE IN THE MATTER OF: RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS DOCKET NUMBER: 97-00922 JUN 2 5 1998 HEARING DESIRED: YES 1 4 APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The decision of the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) be reversed and she be returned to active duty, with back pay and allowances, and all other benefits to which she is entitled. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and opined that the applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802599

    Original file (9802599.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    They subsequently reviewed and upheld the previous boards’ findings and recommendations and directed the applicant’s discharge with severance pay and a disability rating of 10 percent for physical disability. The applicant was found unfit for continued military service and was rated based on her condition at the time of her disability evaluation. Whereas the Air Force rates a member’s disability at the time of separation.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800224

    Original file (9800224.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 31 October 1996, the Secretary of the Air Force agreed with the findings of the IPEB and directed the applicant's permanent retirement, with a 30 percent disability rating. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant stated that the applicant served his last five years of military service with a severe eating disorder that resulted in excessive weight loss and physical disability that was thoroughly evaluated at Wilford Hall Medical Center in 1994. Accordingly, we recommend that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-03123

    Original file (BC-2005-03123.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03123 INDEX CODE: 108.04 COUNSEL: DAV HEARING DESIRED: Not Indicated MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 Apr 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be placed on the permanent disability retired list effective 17 Sep 05. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03437

    Original file (BC-2003-03437.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB recommended she be continued on active duty and referred her records to the IPEB for evaluation. The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of the applicant’s request. The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In her response to the Air Force evaluations, the applicant stated she is very bothered by the Air Force advisories.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00371

    Original file (BC-2003-00371.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. Following DPPD’s assessment, they conclude the applicant was treated fairly throughout the military Disability Evaluation System (DES) process, that he was properly rated under federal disability guidelines at the time of his evaluation, and that he was afforded the opportunity for further review as provided by federal law and policy. As...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02912

    Original file (BC-2012-02912.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 10 Sep 08, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) referred her to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB), based on the diagnoses of metabolic syndrome and fibromyalgia. The applicant did not agree with their findings and recommendation On 9 Dec 10, a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) reviewed her case and also recommended her removal from the TDRL and discharge with severance pay with a 20 percent disability rating. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02712

    Original file (BC-2002-02712.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant indicates in her response to the Air Force evaluation that she disagrees with the BCMR Medical Consultant’s statement of her request. AF Form 618, Medical Board Report, coupled with the narrative summaries/consultations, commander’s letters, etc., address her unfitting conditions as required for review by the PEB. Disability...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01161

    Original file (BC-2005-01161.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01161 INDEX CODE: 108.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 7 OCT 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected to reflect that she was honorably discharged rather than retired on Temporary Disability on 27 January...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03095

    Original file (BC-2003-03095.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 6 March 2000, the applicant submitted her rebuttal letter to SAFPC requesting a disability retirement, with a compensable disability rating of 40 percent. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical records and is of the opinion that the preponderance of the evidence of the record supports a disability rating of 20 percent. A complete...