RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03705
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her Reserve status from 30 Jul 08 to 31 Mar 12 be changed back
to the Selected Reserve.
By letters, dated 10 Oct 12 and 15 Oct 12, the applicant amended
her request as follows:
1. Her Reserve status from May 09 to 31 Mar 12 be changed back
to Selected Reserve.
2. Validate and make it a matter of record that her record was
miscoded by ARPC through no fault of her own.
3. The debt she owed to TRICARE be forgiven based on undue
financial hardship and a coding error out of her control.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was erroneously coded as being a member of the Selected
Reserve four years ago which made her eligible for the TRICARE
Reserve Select program. During those years she utilized TRICARE
and because of the Air Force error she will be held financially
responsible for all TRICARE costs.
Even though the coding error happened in 2008 she did not become
aware of the error until 22 May 12.
By letter, dated 10 Oct 12, the applicant indicated that she
received a letter from the TRICARE Management Activity, noting
that they are holding her family financially responsible for all
healthcare costs due to an administrative error on part of the
Air Force that allowed her TRICARE eligibility. In addition,
she noted that the eligibility period was from May 09 to
31 Mar 12 rather than 30 Jul 08 to 31 Mar 12.
By letter, dated 15 Oct 12, the applicant further explained the
circumstances surrounding the error and that she never
misrepresented herself or her duties. Her duties as a member of
the Participating Individual Ready Reserve (PIRR), requires her
to have a Common Access Card (CAC) card, to log in for duty,
training and other situations and has been the same since she
left active duty.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 30 Jul 08, the applicant resigned her Regular Air Force
commission. On 31 Jul 08, the applicant was appointed in the
Reserve of the Air Force, in the grade of captain, with an
assignment in the PIRR. The applicant was promoted to the grade
of major with an effective date and date of rank of 2 Jun 10.
________________________________________________________________
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/DPTT recommends TRICARE waive recoupment for the specified
time frame, stating, in part, that these administrative errors
were no fault of the applicant.
The following is an analysis of the circumstances surrounding
the case:
a. The applicant's request to have her status changed to
Selected Reserve is not warranted because she was appointed as a
Category E Participating IRR member effective 31 Jul 08.
b. On 10 Apr 09, the HQ ARPC/DEERS Project Office updated the
applicant in the Defense Enrollment and Eligibility Reporting
System (DEERS) Real-Time Automated Personnel Identification
System (RAPIDS) Program Management RAPIDS as a Selective
Reservist for the sole purpose of obtaining a CAC identification
card. This update however, made her incorrectly eligible to
enroll in TRICARE, which she did. On 14 May 09, the Defense
Manpower Data Center (DMDC) changed her Reserve Category Code
(RSVCC) back to IRR/Drill Status code "A" (identifying her as
PIRR). The applicant then contacted DMDC on 29 Jun 09
questioning why she was no longer eligible for Tricare Reserve
Select. DMDC explained she was in the PIRR and referred her
back to the ARPC/DEERS Project Office. On 2 Jul 09, the
ARPC/DEERS Project Office changed her back to Selected Reserve,
once again making her eligible for TRICARE. The applicant
remained coded eligible for TRICARE until 9 Apr 12.
c. On 10 Apr 12, DMDC changed her status back to IRR/Drill
status code "A." On 24 Apr 12, DMDC requested verification of
the applicant's status from the Air Force Reserve Liaison. On
18 May 12, DMDC received confirmation that the applicant was in
the PIRR, and not eligible for TRICARE. On 22 May 12, the
applicant's record was incorrectly updated a third time to
Selected Reserve status by the ARPC/DEERS Project Office, and
then immediately changed back to the IRR.
d. On 23 May 12, DMDC removed all invalid entries made by
the HQ ARPC/DEERS Project Office. When questioned, HQ
ARPC/DEERS Project Office personnel were not sure what source
document caused the conflict. However, email traffic reveals
assignment orders created incorrectly could have been a basis of
the misunderstanding.
The complete DPTT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 26 Nov 12, for review and response. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C).
Pursuant to the Boards request, the applicant was contacted to
provide a copy of the letter of indebtedness she received from
the TRICARE Management Activity.
The applicants complete response, with attachment, is at
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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. After careful
consideration of the applicants complete submission, we believe
that partial relief is warranted. In this respect, we note the
comments by the Air Force Reserve office of primary
responsibility; however, the Board does not choose to adopt
their recommended relief, which, given the complexity of the law
in this area, would raise questions in other agencies about how
to implement the Boards intent. Instead, the Board recommends
a more targeted method for relief of the TRICARE debt. Based on
the evidence, it appears that ARPC erroneously updated the
applicants status in DEERs to reflect that she was assigned as
a Selected Reservist for the sole purpose of obtaining a CAC ID
card. Consequently, this made the applicant incorrectly
eligible to enroll in Tricare Reserve Select, in which she did.
However, the applicant is now being held accountable for actions
that were beyond her control. Therefore, we find it equitable
that her record be corrected to reflect that she was assigned to
the Selected Reserve for the limited purpose of determining
eligibility for TRICARE Reserve Select during the period 14 May
09 thru 31 Mar 12. Moreover, this recommended correction to her
record is not intended to convey any other rights or privileges
associated with Selected Reserve status. In view of the
foregoing, and to preclude an injustice to the applicant, we
recommend the applicants record be corrected to the extent
indicated below.
_______________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that, for the
limited purpose of determining TRICARE Reserve Select
eligibility, she was assigned to the Selected Reserve from
14 May 09 to 31 Mar 12.
________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-03705 in Executive Session on 18 and 19 Jun 13,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Aug 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, ARPC/DPTT, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Nov 12.
Exhibit D. Email, Applicant, dated 19 Jun 13.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03705
On 2 Jul 09, the ARPC/DEERS Project Office changed her back to Selected Reserve, once again making her eligible for TRICARE. On 22 May 12, the applicant's record was incorrectly updated a third time to Selected Reserve status by the ARPC/DEERS Project Office, and then immediately changed back to the IRR. _______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02113
She notes that even the Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) Fact Sheet on the IRR does not disclose information about a Reserve officers promotion status and led her to believe that she would not be discharged unless she requested resignation of her commission. The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A. The applicant was discharged from the Regular Air Force with a separation pay benefit prior to completing her MSO.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02287
The applicant states that on 25 Mar 04, she and the decedent had gone to a Air National Guard post to update their marital status in the Defense Eligibility Enrollment Reporting System (DEERS). We further note the applicant signed for the package sent to the now deceased former member notifying him of his eligibility to participate in the RCSBP. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006577
They tried to send him back $3,600 in premiums and informed him they would collect over $17,000 in medical bills that were paid out for the care of his family from July 2008 to December 2009. d. he called officials of the State of Wyoming, DEERS [Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System], and Tricare to figure out what happened. He also provided email correspondence from a DEERS official who stated: * By law, Tricare uses DEERS to determine eligibility * His DEERS record showed he...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05474
On 21 Mar 11, his son was born and he turned in his sons birth certificate for update in DEERS. Since he had not been married before and was still on Active Reserves, he was told there was nothing else needed and DEERS was updated. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that that the application will only be...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02001
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit B. Further, although the law currently provides automatic coverage for a spouse if the member fails to provide coverage or the spouse does not agree with the decision, no such provisions existed at the time of the member’s eligibility to enroll in the program. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00676
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00676 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her military service obligation be changed to no later than 18 Jul 2015 in regards to transferring Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits. (3)(2), For individuals eligible for retirement on or after Aug 1, 2011, 2 years of additional service required. The DoDI clearly states the amount of service commitment that a...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00700
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00700 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late husbands records be corrected to reflect that he made an election for spouse coverage with immediate coverage based on full retired pay under the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003219
The applicant states, in effect: * her husband is active duty and she is a commissioned officer in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) * both she and her husband took action to transfer education benefits to their children; however, she does not have a copy of the documentation she submitted * their daughter used education benefits transferred by her husband, as did their son (he is currently using those benefits) * she and her husband recognized her husband's benefits would be exhausted before...
CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2003-090
Due to Applicant’s retirement on 01 July 2002, no entries currently exist in DEERS regarding his status during the relevant time period; therefore, there is nothing for the Coast Guard to correct.” APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD The Judge Advocate General further stated that the “Coast Guard’s records support Applicant’s assertions regarding his status as a member of the SELRES during the period 01 February 02 to 30 June 2002. Applicant should be able to use his...