RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02702
INDEX CODE: 145.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be allowed to retire from the Air Force Reserve (AFR) rather than
be discharged.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He attended a Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) where he was
shown a special rule for members with physical disabilities in 12731b,
10 United States Code (U.S.C.), Chapter 1223. He returned to his duty
station at Little Rock AFB and spoke with personnel from his Wing
telling them about 12731b. Someone at his Wing led him to believe he
could retire from the Air Force Reserve (AFRS). He accepted the terms
of the IPEB and found himself discharged with severance pay. He was
told 12731b pertained only to those reservists who had served more
than 15 but less than 20 years and had experienced an injury
considered not in the line of duty were eligible for retirement. It
makes no sense to him. He has been told not to work by his doctor and
feels he accepted the discharge with severance pay as the only choice
he had. He would pay the severance back if he could retire.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a personal
statement and copies of medical documentation, both military and
civilian, as well as a copy of 12731b.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the AFR on 7 October 1991. He was progressively
promoted to the grade of technical sergeant with a date of rank of 1
May 2001. He was mobilized and on 21 March 2004 while deployed to
Kuwait, he injured his back performing his duties. On his way home,
he stopped at Pope AFB where an MRI showed a bulging disk in his back.
He returned to Little Rock AFB where subsequent examination found his
injury to be in the line of duty. He was demobilized on 17 January
2005. He met an Informal PEB (IPEB) on 24 January 2006. The IPEB
recommended he be discharged with severance pay with a 0% disability
rating. He did not agree with the IPEB’s recommendation and, on 1
February 2006, he requested to appear before the FPEB. On 13 April
2006, he requested to waive his earlier request for a formal hearing
and concurred with the findings of the IPEB. He was separated on 24
May 2006 after 15 years, 9 months, and 25 days of service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPD recommended denying his application as he was not
eligible for disability retirement under 12731b because he did not
meet its criteria. 12731b requires the unfitting injury to be not in
the line of duty; his injury occurred when he was on orders and was
considered in the line of duty.
DPPD’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
HQ AFRC/A1B recommends approving his request. A1B believes members,
such as the applicant, should be eligible for early retirement with
pay at age 60 under Title 10, U.S.C. 12731b.
A1B’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant believes he earned retirement benefits by serving for over
15 years and being injured while deployed. After injuring himself
while performing duty in Kuwait and months of subsequent unsuccessful
treatment he underwent an MEB where he was referred to an IPEB. The
IPEB found his injury occurred while in the LOD and thereby made him
ineligible for retirement. He was told he could retire upon returning
to his unit. Had he known he would be disability discharged with
severance pay, he would have appealed the IPEB’s decision. He states
that due to his filing with the Veterans Administration (VA) he will
eventually end up paying the VA all of his severance pay.
_________________________________________________________________
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 AFPC/DPPD and
adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant
has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Title 10, Chapter
12731b is clear in its requirement that any injury to Reserve members
would have to be considered not in the line of duty in order for this
section of law to be invoked. Therefore, in the absence of evidence
to the contrary, we find no compelling 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-
2006-02702 in Executive Session on 10 April 2007, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Aug 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 11 Dec 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Feb 07.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFRC/DPPD, dated 22 Feb 07, w/atchs.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, Undated, w/atchs.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2000-00012-3
The Second Addendum to the Record of Proceedings is at Exhibit W. In his most recent request for reconsideration, applicant contends he should not have been assigned to the Non-participating Ready Reserve Section (NNRPS) in January 1998. At the time he was assigned to NNRPS, he was and still is not qualified for worldwide duty in accordance with ARPC/SGPA memorandum dated 21 May 97. After careful consideration of the applicant's submission it is our opinion that the Air Force Reserve...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01376
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He does not agree with service connected disabilities and discharge with severance pay laws. On 15 January 2008, the Physical Evaluation Board found the applicant unfit for military service and recommended discharge with severance pay with a 20% compensable rating. A1B states Title 10, U.S.C., Section 12731b authorizes retirement with pay at age 60 for members of the Selected Reserve who no longer...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-03145
He was told repeatedly during this time that all AGR, Title 10 members were put into “Returned To Duty” status since active duty couldn’t tell the ANG what to do with their people. In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a personal statement and copies of pertinent medical records, Congressional inquiries, retirement documents, and MEB and IPEB documentation. Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01483
His active duty orders expired on 1 January 2006, and he was not issued medical continuation orders until 7 March 2006. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was not released from active duty on 1 January 2006, but was continued on active duty through 5 February 2006. He was not released from active duty on 1 January...
The AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit L. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant's counsel reiterated his previous assertions and states that he disagrees with DPPD and JA that the applicant did not provide any new evidence. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel reviewed the additional advisory and provided a response which...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00282
SGP finds that during the period following release from active duty orders in October 2006 until completion of DES processing in January 2008, he would have been a candidate for the participation waiver and therefore not eligible for medical continuation orders. It is upon this recommendation that his military record be corrected to reflect service points for the time he was denied participation, 3 October 2006 through 27 February 2008. The complete A1B evaluation, with attachments, is at...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00342
Between 1998 and 2001 prior to his activation, his civilian physicians had treated his Anxiety Disorder with various medications. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/DPM recommends granting Item A by awarding the applicant 10 active duty pay and points for the 1-10 Feb 04 TDY to Lackland AFB, TX, because he should have been on active duty orders at that time. Based on the available documentation, the Consultant concludes the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03169
Disability processing records reveal a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was initiated on 17 Jun 03, and the results was referred to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) which ultimately recommended she be discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay with a 10 percent disability rating. Because her disability rating was rated less than 30 percent disabling, she was not eligible for a disability retirement under the provision of Title 10, USC, Section 1201. Based on a...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02816
The FPEB reviewed the evidence presented and recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 10 percent. Under Title 10, U.S.C., Physical Evaluation Boards must determine if a member’s condition renders them unfit for continued military service relating to their office, grade, rank or rating. The AFPC/DPPD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00677
The applicant disagreed with the IPEB findings and requested a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB). FPEB findings, dated 5 July 1991, found the applicant’s condition was stable and recommended permanent disability retirement at seventy (70) percent. After a thorough review of the available evidence of record, it is our opinion that the service-connected medical conditions that resulted in the applicant’s disability retirement were not combat-related or through an instrumentality of war.