Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04428
Original file (BC 2013 04428.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04428
		COUNSEL: NO
		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her records be corrected to reflect she was retired by reason of 
medical disability effective 11 Jul 95.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her military Identification (ID) card, Veterans Administration, 
United Healthcare Military and Veterans Tricare Prime records do 
not reflect her disability retirement was effective 11 Jul 95, 
which makes it invalid.

Tricare believes she retired in 2011, which affects her premiums 
and benefits.    

In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of her 
DD Form 214, a special order, memorandum, and certificate of 
marriage registration. 

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to special order number ACD-349, dated 18 Nov 93, on 
28 Dec 93, the applicant was relieved from active duty.  On 
29 Dec 93, the applicant’s name was placed on the Temporary 
Disability Retired List (TDRL).  She was credited with 11 years 
and 18 days of active service.   

According to the AFMPC/DPPDS, memorandum dated 11 Jul 95, the 
Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) directed the applicant’s name 
be removed from the TDRL and she be permanently retired under 
the provisions of Title 10, United States Code 1201.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIZ recommends denial.  The Defense Enrollment 
Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) correctly reflects the 
applicant’s effective date of retirement as 29 Dec 93.  A review 
of the applicant’s DEERS history did not reveal any 
inconsistencies regarding her retirement and eligibility to 
medical benefits such as Tricare.  DEERS reflects the 
applicant’s retired ID card was issued on 6 Sep 11; however, the 
ID card issuance itself on 6 Sep 11, did not create her 
eligibility to DEERS or establish her record as a retired Air 
Force member.

The complete DPSIZ evaluation 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 8 Nov 13, for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit C).  As of this date, this office has not received a 
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.  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 the 
rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  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-2013-04428 in Executive Session on 26 Jun 14, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				Panel Chair
      Member
				Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Sep 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIZ, dated 4 Nov 13		
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Nov 13.




								
							Panel Chair


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01017

    Original file (BC-2013-01017.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01017 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her former spouse’s records be changed to reflect their marriage date as 31 May 73, rather than 29 Sep 73, so that she would be eligible for TRICARE benefits under the 20/20/20 marriage rule. The applicant received benefits based on an error in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04581

    Original file (BC 2013 04581.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    AFI 36-3202, Separation Documents is the governing directive for the DD Form 214 and it directs the name on the DD Form 214 be recorded as listed on the military member’s DD Form 4, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document-Armed Forces of the United States. In instances where a name change is effective after the publication of a DD Form 214, the applicants provide those agencies providing the benefit/entitlement or service their DD Form 214 as prepared and show legal documentation to explain the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01240

    Original file (BC-2003-01240.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 Sep 80, the Air Force PEB recommended that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force based on a diagnosis of depressive neurosis with moderate social and industrial impairment with a combined disability rating of 10%. She is not receiving a check because she is listed as being on the TDRL and not retired. Evidence has not been presented which would lead us to believe that the applicant's disability processing and the rating she received at final disposition was contrary to the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04812

    Original file (BC 2013 04812.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, there was no documentation in the evidence of record to indicate the deceased former member was incompetent at the time of his passing. The applicant has provided no evidence her deceased husband was incompetent prior to his death. The service member must live until the date of separation to be considered “retired.” A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPFD recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 03705

    Original file (BC 2012 03705.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2013 | BC-2012-03705

    Original file (BC-2012-03705.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2013 | BC 2012 05676

    Original file (BC 2012 05676.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete DPTT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ 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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 9903103

    Original file (9903103.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The decisions of the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB), dated 29 Jan 98, and the decision of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAF/PC), dated 3 Apr 98, are contrary to law and regulation and violate “minimum concepts of basic fairness.” When all the evidence is considered, the Board should reach the decision that she is unfit for further military service and should be permanently retired, with...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02287

    Original file (BC-2011-02287.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00011

    Original file (BC-2010-00011.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00011 INDEX CODE: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The separation code (SPD) of MGQ (Intradepartmental Transfer) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty be changed to allow him to receive medical benefits. Those members separated under...