RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03051
INDEX CODE: 110.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Forty days of active service credit be added to his record to increase
his total active service time to reflect 20 years of service, enabling
him to receive regular retirement pay under concurrent receipt
provisions.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
In 1992, while serving on active duty, he suffered a stroke. Although
he was only 40 days from a 20-year retirement he was discharged on 5
January 1993 and placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List
(TDRL). In 1994, he was removed from the TDRL and placed on the
Permanent DRL (PDRL). At that time there was no law granting
concurrent receipt. He served honorably in the Air Force for well
over 19 years and would have qualified for a regular retirement if not
for his illness. He is unable to care for himself. His wife works
outside the home and provides care for him. His service for pay is 20
years, 3 months, and 25 days. 40 days of the time he has for basic
pay should be used to increase his constructive service credit.
Granting 40 days service credit would correct this injustice.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies of a
personal statement, legal documents, his DD Form 214, enlisted
performance reports, and several pertinent copies of his disability
retirement documentation.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 11 September 1972 and
enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 15 February 1973. He was
progressively promoted to the grade of master sergeant (MSgt). On 6
January 1993, he was placed on the TDRL after experiencing multiple
strokes. He remained on the TDRL until 10 July 1994 when he was
removed from the TDRL and permanently retired with a disability rating
of 100%. His total service for pay is 20 years, 3 months, and 25
days. His total service towards retirement is 19 years, 10 months,
and 20 days.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRRP recommends denial. DPPRRP notes time spent on the TDRL
is not creditable service towards retirement. They note the
applicant’s total service under 10 United States Code (U.S.C.) Chapter
61 Section 1201 (b)(3)(B) is 19 years, 10 months, and 21 days. He has
provided no evidence of additional active duty after 10 July 1994.
DPPRRP’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 4
November 2005 for review and comment. He withdrew his case from Board
consideration on 13 December 2005 until further notice. On 4 February
2007, he asked that his case be reopened. As of this date, this
office has received no further input from the applicant.
_________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice. 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 basis
for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an
error or injustice. Time spent on the TDRL is not creditable towards
retirement and he was not able to provide any evidence that he had any
more time than the Air Force contends he has earned towards
retirement. His concurrence with the findings of the PEB finalized
his active service at 19 years, 10 months and 21 days. However
unfortunate, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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-
2005-03051 in Executive Session on 1 March 2007, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
Ms. Kathleen B. O’Sullivan, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Sep 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 18 Oct 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Nov 05.
LAURENCE M. GRONER
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | bc-2007-01927
Had she known she could have received a TERA retirement based on years of service, she would have taken that instead of appealing the decision of the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) regarding her retirement at 30 percent disability. Had she been returned to duty on 21 Aug 94, instead of permanently retired, she still could have requested to retire under TERA not later than 1 Sep 94 under the FY94 Force Reduction Program, a later TERA program, or retire at 20 years TAFMS, her mandatory...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02697
According to DPPD, when a member is removed from the TDRL, a new DD Form 214 is not issued. The order becomes a permanent part of his military personnel file, and can be attached to his DD Form 214 reflecting his final disposition. Evidence has not been presented which would lead us to believe that his disability discharge, placement on the TDRL on 19 July 1990 and the final disposition of his case on 9 September 1993 were in error or contrary to the governing Air Force instructions, which...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01143
Although changing the former member’s Air Force TDRL disability rating will not result in any additional monetary benefits for his heirs, the BCMR Medical Consultant opines that the preponderance of the evidence of the record warrants a higher TDRL disability rating than the 40 percent originally adjudicated and concludes that the evidence of the record most nearly approximates the 60 percent rating but notes that greater weight given to the relative contribution of the mood disorder and...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01177
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSFOC recommended approval noting the applicant requested an extension of his HYT in Nov 03, but was disapproved by AFPC/DPPRR on 4 Feb 04. AFPC/DPSFOC indicated that since his second request was disapproved on 11 Mar 04 and his retirement date was 1 Apr 04, this only left the applicant enough time to out-process the Air Force prior to his retirement. They believe the applicant’s retirement date...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02675
DPPRRP states in part, time spent on the TDRL does not count as active service for retirement, even though a member may be later found to be fit for duty by a Physical Evaluation Board and returned to active duty. The DPPRRP evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 6 Oct 06, for review and comment within...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02040
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRRP states in accordance with 10 USC, Section 1208, the time the applicant spent on the TDRL is not creditable service for retirement. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded his time on the TDRL should be credited as active duty time. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00872
Combining both the Army Reserve and Air Force Reserve service, he received credited with one year of satisfactory Federal service for the period 11 January 1975 to 10 January 1976. A review of the applicant’s military personnel record indicates he completed a total of 23 years, 11 months and 22 days of honorable service as of 2 January 1993, his date of discharge from the Air Force Reserve. However, only 19 years and 11 months of this time is satisfactory service creditable toward retired...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02511
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Air Force historically awards the LOM to colonels and above while the MSM is awarded to lieutenant colonels and below. On 22 Mar 04, the Board considered and granted the applicant's request for consideration for promotion to the grade of colonel by an SSB. Applicant notes that in accordance with the AFI the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council is the approval authority, the entire career...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00213
On 1 May 1987, the applicant requested voluntary separation from active duty under Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10, paragraph 3-19, for hardship. The applicant, by virtue of having over 20 years TAFMS on 1 June 1987, could have requested a waiver (for hardship reasons) of his promotion ADSC in accordance with AFR 35-7, Service Retirements, in order to retire rather than separate on that date. Now the applicant believes the Board should correct his military records, in the interest of...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00326
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In her quest to become pregnant and have a family, with over 19 years of service, she elected to take the Special Separation Benefit (SSB) in order to pay for medical procedures she could not obtain in the military. Based on the documentation in the applicant’s master personnel file, she voluntarily applied to separate from the Air Force to receive the Special Separation Benefit being offered at that...