RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03035
INDEX CODE: 108.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty,
reflect that he was discharged on 13 August 1999 when he was released from
the temporary disability retired list (TDRL), rather than 28 October 1997.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not issued a DD Form 214 that reflects he was discharged from the
TDRL on 13 August 1999.
In support of his request, the applicant provided documentation extracted
from his military personnel record.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
A Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) convened on 9 April 1997 and referred his
case to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) with a diagnosis of
delusional disorder, persecutory type with definite social and industrial
adaptability impairment. His case was referred to the Informal Physical
Evaluation Board (IPEB). On 19 August 1997, the IPEB found him unfit for
further military service based on a diagnosis of delusional disorder. The
IPEB recommended that he be placed on the TDRL with a compensable rating of
30%. On 29 October 1997, he was placed on the TDRL. The applicant agreed
with the findings and recommended disposition of the IPEB. On 13 August
1999, he was removed from the TDRL and discharged with severance pay with a
zero percent disability rating. He served 15 years and 9 months on active
duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial. DPSDD states the purpose of the DD Form 214
is to show a member’s active duty time. Time spent on the TDRL is not
active duty time. When the member is removed from the TDRL, a new DD Form
214 is not issued. Rather, the member receives a Special Order indicating
his final status. That order becomes a permanent part of his military
personnel file, and can be attached to his DD Form 214 reflecting his final
disposition. His request to amend or change his DD Form 214 would be in
violation of Air Force Instructions and is not authorized. AFPC/DPSDD’s
complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 30 November 2007, the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for
review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this
office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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. After thoroughly reviewing the
evidence of record and noting the applicant’s contentions, we are not
persuaded that his DD Form 214 is in error. The DD Form 214 accurately
reflects his release from active duty and temporary disability retirement.
In accordance with established procedures, when members are removed from
the TDRL a new DD Form 214 is not issued because the DD Form 214 reflects
only periods of active duty time. While on the TDRL, members are in a
retired status. Special orders are issued at the time of final
disposition. In the applicant’s case, a special order was issued on 23
July 1999, reflecting his removal from the TDRL and discharge by reason of
physical disability with entitlement to disability severance pay. We
suggest that the applicant keep this special order with his DD Form 214.
Therefore, 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. 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 the evidence presented did not demonstrate the
existence of an error or injustice; the application was denied without a
personal appearance; and 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-2007-
03035 in Executive Session on 10 January 2008, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Panel Chair
Mr. Mark J. Novitski, Member
Mrs. Lea Gallogly, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSDD, dated 22 October 2007.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 November 2007.
JAMES W. RUSSELL, III
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03224
His records be corrected to reflect that his service- connected disability of Schizophrenia is combat related. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial, indicating the preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred in...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 00052
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states even though PTSD may not have been an available diagnosis at the time of the applicant's military service, a mental health professional would have/should have been able to extract and list any signs and symptoms believed to be the result of an identifiable trauma, and to include these in the narrative summary if they were present at the time of evaluation. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00322
On 9 September 2003, the applicant was placed on the TDRL. The complete AFPC/DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 24 April 2009 for review and response within 30 days. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2009-00322 in Executive...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02867
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The DVA awards service connection for claimed disability but does not make a determination as to whether conditions are combat...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00707
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00707 INDEX CODE: 108.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty, of his deceased spouse and former Air Force member, be changed to show she was removed from the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) and was permanently...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02228
The IPEB noted that she had declined further “ablation surgery.” On 9 March 2006, the applicant concurred with the findings and recommended disposition of the IPEB. The complete AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ 5 APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 15 Feb 13, by letter, the applicant amended her request and now ask to be medically retired instead of being returned to duty. ...
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 | CY2013 | BC-2013-00990
The evidence supports that both Delusional Disorder and PTSD were present, unfitting and compensable at the time the applicant was placed on the TDRL. The Air Force disability boards must rate disabilities based on the member's condition at the time of evaluation. The complete Medical Consultants evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Regarding the diagnosis of PTSD, counsel states that no...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00457
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 04-00457 INDEX NUMBER: 145.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His retirement order be changed to reflect that he received a non- disability retirement and that his AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, Item 10c, be changed to read that his medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04516
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The applicants contends that his episodic vertigo is combat related due to the time he spent deployed to Iraq during Jan through Jul 08; however, the applicant admits to not seeking immediate medical attention for his dizziness at the time he began experiencing it and there is no LOD determination as to the initial...