RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04435
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His date of separation be adjusted to reflect he completed
twenty years of total active duty.
2. His narrative reason for separation be changed to reflect
permanent disability retirement.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was removed from the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL)
effective 19 May 2009, and permanently retired. Therefore, his
date of retirement should be 19 May 2009. This error prevents
him from receiving Concurrent Receipt Disability Pay (CRDP).
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 26 October 2005, an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB)
determined the applicant was unfit to reasonably perform the
duties of his office, grade, rank, and rating due to his
diagnosis of Sarcoidosis with associated Neurosarcoidosis,
Parasthesias, Diplopia, and Headache. The IPEB recommended he be
placed on the TDRL with a compensable disability rating of 60
percent. The applicant concurred with the IPEB findings and
recommendation and waived his right to a Formal Physical
Evaluation Board (FPEB). The Secretary of the Air Force (SecAF)
approved the IPEB recommendation and directed the applicant be
placed on the TDRL. As a result, the applicant was retired
effective 9 December 2005, in the grade of technical sergeant,
after serving 18 years and 5 months on active duty.
A TDRL reevaluation, dated 20 February 2009, indicates the IPEB
found that although the applicants condition had improved, it
appeared to have stabilized and would not likely change over the
next several years. As a result, the IPEB recommended the
applicant be permanently retired with a compensable disability
rating of 30 percent. The applicant initially non-concurred with
the IPEB findings and recommendation and requested an FPEB.
However, after consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his
right to an FPEB and concurred with the IPEB indicating it was in
his best interest to accept the findings and recommended
disposition. The Secretary of the Air Force approved the
recommended disposition and directed the applicant be removed
from the TDRL and permanently retired under the provisions of
Title 10, United States Code, Section 1201, effective 19 May
2009.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of
primary responsibility at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPFD recommends denial as time spent on the TDRL does not
count toward active duty time. The applicant served 18 years and
5 months on active duty; therefore, he does not have the required
20 years of active duty in order to apply for CRDP.
The preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice
occurred during the disability processing or at the time of
separation.
The complete DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the evaluation by the Air Force office of primary
responsibility was forwarded to the applicant on 30 October 2012
for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this
date, this office has received no reply.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an injustice. After
thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the
applicants contention, we find no basis to adjust his records to
reflect 20-years of active service in order for him to qualify
for CRDP. As indicated by the Air Force office of primary
responsibility, time spent on the TDRL is not considered active
service. In view of this and in the absence of evidence of
additional active service, we find no basis to disturb his total
active service. With respect to his request to change the
narrative reason for his separation, the applicant must realize
that a DD Form 214 is prepared to document periods of active duty
and contains a narrative description of the basis for the
separation. At the time the contested DD Form 214 was issued, it
correctly identified the basis for his separation, i.e., his
temporary disability. Since he was not subsequently returned to
active duty after TDRL re-evaluation but instead permanently
retired by reason of physical disability, the special order,
dated 29 April 2009, serves as the source for the final
disposition in his case. Therefore, in view of the above and in
the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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-2012-04435 in Executive Sessions on 27 June 2013, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-04435:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dtd 19 Sep 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dtd 18 Oct 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dtd 30 Oct 12.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03593
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there was no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred during the disability process. The applicant does not have the required 20 years of active service time to apply for CRDP. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03839
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02880
A complete copy of the NGB/A1PS evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPFD recommends denial, indicating, there is no evidence of an error or injustice with respect to the applicants disability processing. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 17 Feb 13 for review and comment within 30 days. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | bc 2012 01218
In support of her request, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of a letter from her civilian medical provider, extracts from her medical records, AF Form 356, and other various documents in support of her application. On 29 Apr 11, the IPEB reviewed the applicants case, found her unfit and recommended she be removed from the TDRL and discharged with severance pay with a compensable disability rating of 10 percent for chronic law back pain in accordance with the Veterans...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03698
In view of the fact that her career was cut short due to malpractice, she should be credited with the 20 years of active service that she planned to perform and entitled to full concurrent receipt of her military disability retired pay and disability compensation from the DVA. The applicant contends she should be awarded a longevity retirement (as if she had served 20 years) since it was her intent to complete the required service for retirement from active duty. While she may have...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02126
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice noting the applicant underwent his first periodic reexamination and was found fit and was removed from TDRL. On 13 Mar 13, the applicant was removed from the TDRL with the reentry code of 3K which allows the service member to be eligible to enlist in any branch of the service. If the medical condition has improved or stabilized, the service member could receive permanent disability...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00766
The Air Force disability boards must rate disabilities based on the member's condition at the time of evaluation; in essence a snapshot of their condition at that time. Following this reasoning one could conclude that assigning the rating as determined by the DVA based on evidence during the members active service would be proper, since it was based upon clinical assessments conducted before her actual date of discharge. c. All requested medical documentation should be supplied to the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02749
The complete DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends amending the applicants record to reflect he was removed from the TDRL and permanently retired with a 50 percent disability rating due to PTSD, under VASRD Code 9411, effective 12 March 2012. While the Medical Consultant recommends granting the applicant the 50 percent rating, he does not believe this should be based upon the documentation from the DVA; as this evidence was the same old evidence utilized...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01142
The MEB recommended referral to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB). When the applicant was removed from the TDRL he was not entitled to a new DD Form 214 since the time spent on the TDRL was not active duty time. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates his argument that his records should be corrected to reflect that he is...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03623
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03623 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be given credit for 20 years of active service toward retirement. He believes because of this injustice he should be credited with the 45 days of service in order to qualify for the Concurrent Retirement Disability Pay (CRDP). No provisions of...