RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01097 INDEX CODE:	136.00

COUNSEL:	NONE HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His	records	be	corrected	to	reflect	his	eligibility	for Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay (CRDP).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was medically retired with less than 20 years of active service after he was unable to perform his job as an air traffic controller due to the medication he was prescribed. He was told that his retirement pay was computed to 20 years. He accepted a medical retirement instead of making the Air Force retain him for the 8-9 months because it was cost effective. If CRDP was in effect at that time, he would have never accepted a medical retirement.

In 2003 when CRDP was approved, he was left out because of the requirement to have 20 years of active duty service, even though he was paid as a 20-year retiree. Why was his 19 plus years of service not as important as anyone else’s? Even those that chose to retire early were allowed to receive their retirement and Veterans’ Administration (VA) Disability. Retirees who choose to retire early (15 years) are allowed to receive CRDP. Reservists who can get a “20 Good Year Letter” are allowed to receive CRDP.

In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Special Order Number ACD-2574, and a Letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs pertaining to information regarding property tax exemption.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant served on active duty from 3 Jul 74 to 18 Oct 93. His highest rank held was master sergeant. He served as an air traffic control supervisor.

The applicant was referred to a medical board on 13 Jul 93. His medical board was reviewed by an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) on 16 Jul 93 and their recommendation was permanent disability retirement with a 30 percent disability rating for a diagnosis of somatoform pain disorder associated with Sjogren’s syndrome, fibromyalgia, and patellofemoral syndrome. Initially the member non-concurred with the findings and requested a formal hearing. On 16 Aug 93, he waived his request for a formal hearing and accepted the findings of the IPEB. Special Order ACD-02574, dated 7 Sep 93, established his date of separation as
18 Oct 93. The member served 19 years, 3 months, and 16 days of active military service.

The Concurrent Retirement and Disability Payment (CRDP) program, is a phased-in restoration of the retired pay deducted from military retiree’s accounts due to their receipt of Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) compensation. To be eligible for CRDP members have to have a DVA-rated, service-connected disability of
50 percent or higher and have twenty (20) or more qualifying years of service for a normal retirement.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. The preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or at the time of separation.

To qualify for CRDP, members must have 20 or more years of active service. He does not have the required 20 years of active service time to apply for CRDP.

The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 16 May 08, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response has not been received.

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 error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of
1.	
the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 Docket Number BC-2008-01097 in Executive Session on 7 Aug 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair 
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2008-01097 was considered:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 14 Mar 07, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 16 Apr 08.
Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 May 08.