RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-00735

	COUNSEL: NONE
	
	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His regular retirement be corrected to medical disability retirement.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He should have received a medical disability retirement.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is on the Retired Reserve list in the grade of technical sergeant. 

On 20 Mar 03, the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) returned the applicant Fit for Duty; Medically Nondeployable and assigned deployment availability code (DAC) 42 with a re-evaluation period/expiration date of 28 Feb 05 (sooner if condition deteriorates).

On 22 Jan 08, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Air National Guard for medical disqualification and on 23 Jan 08, he was relieved from his, then, current assignment in the grade of technical sergeant and assigned to the Retired Reserve list awaiting pay at age 60 (18 Feb 28).  

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/SG recommends denying the application.  On 12 Dec 07, the applicant was found disqualified for world wide deployability (WWD).  Based on the regulation that was in effect at the time, AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, (2005), members were discharged immediately if found to have not in line of duty medically disqualifying conditions.  The applicant’s case was handled in a consistent manner to others in that period of time.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 25 Jul 18 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.   After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of NGB/SG and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  While the applicant asserts a date of discovery less than three years before the Board’s receipt of the application, the Board does not find the assertion reasonable.  The Board finds the application untimely and concludes it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-00735 in Executive Session on 5 Sep 18:

Panel Chair 
Panel Member
Panel Member

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 16 Feb 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, NGB/SG, dated 17 Apr 17.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 25 Jul 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.