RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02766
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His separation code (SDN) of 277 in Block 11c of his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, be changed to show a medical discharge for reason of physical disability.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His DD Form 214 incorrectly reflects an SDN of 277, which means physical disability, existed prior to service (EPTS), instead of a medical discharge. He injured his eye during a fight in the barracks and it never got any better, so he was medically discharged.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
According to the DD Form 214 submitted by the applicant:
a. The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 14 Dec 59.
b. On 18 Jan 60, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, and was credited with one month and five days of active service.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Because the member was separated back in 1960 and the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) could not provide his records, the only information available is from the DD Form 214 he submitted. The member was separated under AFM 35-4, the regulation for medical separations/retirements in effect in 1960. SDN Code 277 indicates the applicant was medically discharged for a condition that existed prior to service and he was not entitled to severance pay. The applicant has provided no documentation to indicate his separation was not executed in accordance with proper guidance.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFD 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 27 Oct 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:
After careful consideration of applicants request and the available evidence of record, we find the application untimely. Applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603. Applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the merits. Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to file in a timely manner.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02766 in Executive Session on 16 Apr 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02766 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Jul 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPFD, dated 12 Aug 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Oct 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03311
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. However, after admittedly making false statements regarding the extent of his injuries, the applicant's neurogenic bladder injuries were subsequently rated by the IPEB at 60...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03014
Further, it must be noted the United States Air Force disability boards must rate disabilities based on the members condition at the time of the evaluation; in essence a snapshot of their condition at that time. The result of the inquiry stated that he did not file VA Form 21-826, Notice to a Retired Veteran of his Right of Election to Receive Disability Compensation, within one year after his discharge. He feels he should receive all medical retirement compensation that was due from 27...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01708
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01708 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His rank listed on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued 3 Dec 07, in Block 4a/b, Grade, Rate or Rank/Pay Grade, be changed to Staff Sergeant (SSgt/E-5). His untimely application should be considered in the interest of justice because he received a form from the Physical...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05087
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) reviewed the applicants medical board on 18 Jun 97 for osteoarthritis, bilateral hips, right greater than left and recommended discharge with...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03327
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02132
He never stated that he had injured his ankle because he never had and was unaware that his records reflected that he had injured his ankle six years prior to entering the Air Force until he requested a copy of his records. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSD recommends denial, stating, in part, the preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or at time of separation. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02246
On 16 Jan 98, he was scheduled for his first TDRL re-evaluation and the IPEB reviewed the medical information on 2 Feb 98 and recommended the applicant be removed from TDRL and DWSP with a 10 percent disability rating. Further, it must be noted the Air Force disability boards must rate disabilities based on the members condition at the time of evaluation; in essence a snapshot of their condition at that time. A complete copy of the Medical Consultants evaluation is at Exhibit...
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 04206
The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 25 April 2014, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice to warrant changing the applicants RE code or separation code as requested. Therefore, we recommend the applicant's records be corrected to the extent indicated below.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02251
She was advised by members of the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) would be recorded on her DD Form 214. The DD Form 214 reflects the active duty grade the member held at time of retirement and the retirement order also reflects this rank as highest grade held on active duty, which was senior airman (E-4). The DD Form 214 is correct in this case, as it reflects the highest grade held while on active duty and the retirement order is also correct, in that...