Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01422
Original file (BC-2006-01422.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-01422
            INDEX CODE:  131.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  12 NOVEMBER 2007

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His retirement pay be increased based on the latest retirement pay chart.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is perplexed by the current retirement system.  He retired from the  U.S.
Air Force in 1984 with over 25 years of active service.   According  to  his
annual retirement account statement his  gross  pay  is  $4,188  per  month;
however,  according  to  the  2006  Military  Pay  Chart  for   commissioned
officers, the monthly retirement entitlement for an 0-5 with  25-plus  years
is $4,509.

When he checked with the Defense Finance and Accounting  Service  (DFAS)  he
was told both figures are correct, which means  that  a  Lieutenant  Colonel
retiring today with exactly the same amount of  active  duty  as  he  served
makes $321 per month or $3,852 per year more than he does.  He asks,  “Where
is the equity?”

He requests someone check with the Department of Defense  to  see  how  they
justify such a disparity.  If there is no justification, he  asks  that  his
retirement pay be recomputed based on the latest retirement pay  chart.   It
may be that his retirement pay has been incorrectly computed  for  the  past
20-plus years.

In  support  of  the  application,  the  applicant  submits   his   personal
statement.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to information contained in the  Military  Personnel  Data  System
(MilPDS) the applicant retired  in  the  grade  of  Lieutenant  Colonel  and
separated from active service on 31 October 1984.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

DFAS recommends denial.   DFAS  states  the  applicant  was  placed  on  the
Retired List pursuant to the provisions of  Title  10,  United  States  Code
(USC), Section 8911.  His retired pay was computed based  on  the  provision
of 10 USC, Section 8991  which  provides  that  the  retired  pay  shall  be
computed based on the rate of final basic pay received.   DFAS  explains  10
USC 1401a provides that the retired pay shall  be  increased  based  on  the
increase to the Consumer Price Index.  There  is  no  provision  of  law  to
authorize the recomputing retired pay on each new rate of active duty  basic
pay.

The complete DFAS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force Evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 26  May
2006 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this  date,  this  office
has received no response (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________

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.  After a thorough  review  of  the
evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we  are  not  persuaded  that
his  current  retirement  pay  should  be  increased  based  on  the  latest
retirement pay chart.  Therefore, we agree with the recommendations  of  the
Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its  rationale  as  the
basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the  victim  of  an
error or injustice. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we  find  no
significant  basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief  sought   in   this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2006-
01422 in Executive Session on 25 July 2006, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
      Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
      Mr. Elwood C. Lewis III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 May 06, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, DFAS, dated 18 May 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 May 06.




      JAMES W. RUSSELL III
      Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00938

    Original file (BC-2006-00938.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DFAS recommends denial and states that there is no evidence of any error, and no correction is authorized. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case to include his contention that he did not receive a pay raise in October 1971; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00117

    Original file (BC-2006-00117.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She took her oath of office and became a member of the Air Force on 29 Mar 63, which would credit her with over 20 years of service for purposes of qualifying her for the CRDP. 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 its rationale as the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02235

    Original file (BC-2012-02235.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A member who retires under TERA is entitled to recomputation of retired pay if such member is credited with employment under the provisions of 10 U.S.C. The enhanced retirement qualification period is the period between the date of early retirement and the date on which the member would have otherwise completed 20 years of military service for purposes of computing the members retired pay. There is no evidence he was employed by a public service organization between those dates.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9703479

    Original file (9703479.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Retirements Branch, Directorate of Personnel Program Mgmt, AFPC/DPPRR, reviewed the application and states that an audit confirmed member had accumulated 19 years, 5 months, and 11 days for active duty credit; therefore, he did not have the required 20 years and 1 day required for service retirement eligibility. If he understands correctly what that block means, it means he has 240 months of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-03479

    Original file (BC-1997-03479.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Retirements Branch, Directorate of Personnel Program Mgmt, AFPC/DPPRR, reviewed the application and states that an audit confirmed member had accumulated 19 years, 5 months, and 11 days for active duty credit; therefore, he did not have the required 20 years and 1 day required for service retirement eligibility. If he understands correctly what that block means, it means he has 240 months of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02124

    Original file (BC-2006-02124.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02124 INDEX NUMBER: 136.00 XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 JAN 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be eligible for benefits under the Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01854

    Original file (BC-2006-01854.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    As he had reached his maximum age of service, he applied for retirement as a Reserve of the Air Force and he was retired in his federally recognized grade of MG. The CGO’s deny the authority for a member, previously retired and in receipt of retired pay to “re-retire” and be credited for time served and a higher grade acquired after retirement. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03312

    Original file (BC-2006-03312.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03312 INDEX NUMBER: 136.00 XXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 30 APR 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be eligible for benefits under the Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00646

    Original file (BC-2006-00646.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of applicant’s request stating, in part, a review of the Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS) files and Air Force Military Personnel files indicates applicant was medically retired after 12 years and 3 month of active service. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03461

    Original file (BC-2006-03461.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03461 INDEX NUMBER: 136.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 12 MAY 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be eligible for benefits under the Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...