RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-04610

  						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be able to receive her retired pay concurrent with her Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) disability compensation.  In a subsequent request, she requests her retired pay be reinstated effective November 2015.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

As of October 2015, her disability rating increased to 90 percent and, by law, she is authorized to receive concurrent retired pay and DVA compensation.  However, she is not receiving her retired pay as she is not considered a 20-year veteran/retiree.  She served 19 years, 8 months, and 11 days and was never advised she would not be considered a 20-year retiree.  Had she known, she would never have accepted the retirement.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 25 Feb 79.

On 9 Jun 98, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board found the applicant unfit for degenerative disc disease with a 40 percent disability rating.  

On 7 Nov 98, the applicant was placed on the Permanent Disability Retired List and was credited with 19 years, 8 months, and 12 days of active service.  

Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay (CRDP) allows military retirees to receive both military retired pay and the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) compensation.  This was prohibited until the CRDP program began on 1 Jan 04.  Qualified individuals are those who are retired active or age 60 retired reserve members who also have a combined VA disability rating of 50% or greater. Members retired under military disability provisions (Title 10, United States Code, Chapter 61) must have at least 20 years of 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:

DFAS-JFBEB/CL does not make a recommendation.  CRDP requires a member be eligible for retirement under any other provision of law outside a disability retirement.  She is ineligible for a retirement under any other provision of law and as a result is not eligible for CRDP.  Only since October 2015, now that her DVA award exceeds her retired pay amount, does she feel this is an injustice.  

A complete copy of the DFAS-JFBEB/CL evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant refutes virtually every point made by the OPR and argues that her situation of not being considered a retiree didn’t become apparent until her disability increased to 90 percent and her military retired pay was stopped.  The applicant refers to Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA) authorizes service members with over 15 years, but less than 20 to apply for early retirement.  She asks the Board, in the spirit of justice, to waive the few months of active duty service that would have taken her to the 20-year mark in order to reinstate her retired pay.  

A complete copy of the applicant’s rebuttal is at Exhibit E.  

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant was timely filed.

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.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

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-2015-04610 in Executive Session on 9 Feb 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04610 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Forms 149, dated 20 Oct 15 and 20 Jan 16,
  w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, DFAS-JFBEB/CL, dated 11 Aug 16.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Aug 16.
	Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 12 Sep 16.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.