RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01110 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His National Archives (NA) Form 13038, Certificate of Military Service, be changed to indicate his active duty service was for other than training purposes. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, indicates his active duty service from 13 May 1968 through 12 December 1968; however, his NA Form 13038 indicates the time was for active duty for training. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal letter, and copies of his DD Form 214, NA Form 13038, and National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service in the Air National Guard. The applicant’s complete submissions, with attachments, is at Exhibit A-1 and A-2. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Pennsylvania Air National Guard (ANG) who served as a Medical Services Specialist and was promoted to the grade of sergeant (E-4) with a date of rank of 1 October 1968. His DD Form 214 indicates he served on active duty from 13 May 1968 to 12 December 1968. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPSVT recommends denial. DPSVT indicates they attempted to obtain the applicant’s military service records from the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC); however, they were unable to receive them due to the records being a biohazard. However, his DD Form 214, dated 12 December 1968, reflects seven months of total active duty from 13 May 1968 to 12 December 1968. The complete DPSVT evaluation is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The fact that NPRC is unable to provide adequate records due to a biohazard risk is not his problem. If his DD Form 214 is adequate proof of his service to his Country, then why provide a NA Form 13038 at all? The applicant’s complete rebuttal is at 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 note the applicant requests to have his NA Form 13038 for the period 1 October 19665 to 29 January 1966 corrected to reflect active duty service rather than active duty for training. However, according to his NGB Form 22, the applicant attended Basic Military Training (1 October 1965 through 16 November 1965) and Medical Service Specialist School (17 November 1965 through 29 January 1966) as an Air National Guardsman. Both of these periods of active service are considered active duty for training. However, the evidence of record also contains a DD Form 214 which reflects the applicant served seven months of active duty service from 13 May 1968 to 12 December 1968. The DD Form 214 is the source document used for identifying active duty service. It is also used by the Department of Veteran Affairs to identify VA benefits qualification. It appears the applicant may be confused in that he believes the NA Form 13038 is for his active duty service period, when in fact it is for his active duty for training period. Based on the foregoing, we find the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Accordingly, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01110 in Executive Session on 7 April 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01110: Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 19 Dec 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, ARPC/DPAPP, dated 16 Dec 10. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jan 11. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 18 Jan 11.