Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04794
Original file (BC 2013 04794.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-04794

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE INDICATED

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her disability retirement be changed to a retirement under the Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA).  


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She became aware of her eligibility for retirement under TERA upon receiving a service connected 50% disability rating from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).  At the time of her separation, she should have received the same retirement benefit privileges as given to other service members that retired under TERA.  However, she was offered a permanent discharge and retirement with a 40% disability rating.  She served honorably and would have remained serving twenty years or more, but due to having arthritis and the military offering an early out she elected to accept the permanent disability retirement.  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 11 Jun 76.  

On 30 Jun 94, the Secretary of the Air Force directed the applicant be permanently retired under the provisions of 10 USC § 1201, Regulars and members on active duty for more than 30 days: retirement.  

On 29 Aug 94, the applicant was released from active duty and was permanently retired for physical disability in the grade of master sergeant, with a 40 percent compensable disability rating, effective 30 Aug 94.  She was credited with 18 years, 2 months, and 19 days of total active service.

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/DPSOR recommends denial.  The applicant was not eligible to apply for retirement under the TERA since she was found physically unfit for continued service under Air Force Regulation 35-4, Physical Evaluation for Retention.  In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1992 (FY92 NDAAA), Public Law (PL) 102-484, 23 Oct 92, Congress enacted TERA, which permitted selected military members early retirement.  This temporary legislation was a force-shaping drawdown tool; not an entitlement.  In addition it permitted each service to target segments of its eligible population where it would most likely have losses occur.  The guidelines for the FY94 program were published in Military Personnel Flight Letters (MPFL) 93-024 and 93-041.  In MPFL 93-024, it states in part, the Air Force outlined members who were specifically excluded from consideration under TERA, which included members who were not physically fit for retention under the provisions of AFR 35-4.  As such, there is no evidence of an error or injustice in the applicant’s record.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8 Sep 14 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).


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.  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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material 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-2013-04794 in Executive Session on 18 Nov 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Dec 13.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 9 Mar 14, w/atch.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Sep 14.

						

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01718

    Original file (BC 2014 01718.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01718 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His retired pay be recalculated when he turns 62 years old to include public community service he performed after he retired in accordance with the Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00586

    Original file (BC-2013-00586.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was not aware of the program to perform and report public and community service to receive credit toward her retired pay at age 62. Section 4464 of the FY93 NDAA allowed eligible members retired under TERA to perform public and community service following retirement and receive credit for this service to be used to recompute military retired pay, and where applicable, the Survivor Benefit Plan...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05807

    Original file (BC 2012 05807.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force which is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Section 4464 of the Fiscal Year 1993 National Defense Authorization Act allowed eligible members retired under TERA to perform public and community...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05807

    Original file (BC 2012 05807.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force which is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Section 4464 of the Fiscal Year 1993 National Defense Authorization Act allowed eligible members retired under TERA to perform public and community...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9501906

    Original file (9501906.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Programs and Procedures Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRP, reviewed applicant's request for reconsideration and recommended denial. Although he repeatedly states his decision to apply for VSI was involuntary, based on discussions with others, he voluntarily applied for VSI and continued his application when he was provided the correct information. Military Personnel Flight Letter (MPFL) 93-78, Atch 2, para 2a, dated 29 Dec 93 (Atch l), clearly stated, “Line captains in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | bc-2007-01927

    Original file (bc-2007-01927.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Had she known she could have received a TERA retirement based on years of service, she would have taken that instead of appealing the decision of the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) regarding her retirement at 30 percent disability. Had she been returned to duty on 21 Aug 94, instead of permanently retired, she still could have requested to retire under TERA not later than 1 Sep 94 under the FY94 Force Reduction Program, a later TERA program, or retire at 20 years TAFMS, her mandatory...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800186

    Original file (9800186.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. It also includes information on recomputation of retired pay at age 62.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200431

    Original file (0200431.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 02-00431 INDEX CODE 106.00 111.02 136.00 COUNSEL: VFW HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1995 general discharge be upgraded to honorable and he be authorized a 15-year retirement under the Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA) Program. In his letter to the SAF, he asked to retire effective 1 Aug 94...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800528

    Original file (9800528.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. QFFICER/ENLISTED PROGRAM. The Secretary of each Military Department may prescribe regulations and policies regarding the criteria for eligibility for early retirement under the authority of reference (a) and this implementing guidance.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00001

    Original file (BC-2009-00001.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He be retired for length of service with an effective date of 15 Feb 99 versus receiving a permanent disability retirement. He would have continued in the Air Force had it not been for receiving a medical retirement. The DPSOR complete advisory is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In a five page rebuttal, the applicant’s counsel states the USAF Physical Disability Division’s advisory opinion is not accurate.