RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03470 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty be corrected to reflect the following: a. Block 12b, Separation Date This Period to reflect a date of separation (DOS) of “24 Aug 82” rather than “12 Aug 82.” b. Block 14, Military Education to reflect “Basic Parachutist Course.” c. Block 17, Days Accrued Leave Paid to reflect “zero” rather than “11.5.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. His DD Form 214 does not accurately reflect he was on terminal leave for 11.5 days; therefore, his DOS should be 24 Aug 82. 2. He cannot explain why the basic parachutist course is not listed on his DD Form 214. 3. He will be denied certain veteran benefits because of these errors. These benefits are important to him and his family. The applicant did not provide any documents in support of his request. The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant served on active duty from 10 Jun 79 to 12 Aug 82. By letter, The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) notified the applicant that he was paid all pay and allowances as well as a lump sum leave in the amount of 11.5 days. Also, there was no report of terminal leave posted through 24 Aug 85. On 3 Jun 82, in accordance with (IAW) the provisions of AFR 36- 12, Administrative Separation of Commissioned Officers, the applicant requested release from extended active duty, effective 2 Aug 82. The specific reasons for the request were: a) Incompatibility with military environment. b) Lack of effective use of talents and expertise. c) Desire to pursue a career in the Criminal Justice profession. On 16 Jun 82, the Headquarters 552d Airborne Warning and Control Wing Commander recommended the applicant’s application for release from extended active duty be approved. On 27 Jul 82, the Secretary of the Air Force approved the applicant’s request for release from extended active duty IAW AFR 36-12, to be effective 2 Aug 82. On 28 Jul 82, AFMPC/MPCAK01 notified the applicant’s unit that his application for separation dated 3 Jun 82 and submitted IAW AFR 36-12, has been approved to be effective as soon as possible (ASAP). According to his DD Form 214, he was separated on 12 Aug 82, after serving three years, two months and three days on active duty. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial of his request to change his DOS to 29 Aug 82. DPSOS states applicant’s who are given a separation date of ASAP are given at least 10 days to out-process their unit. Since the unit was notified on 2 Aug 82, a separation date of 12 Aug 82 is a correct separation date. The applicant’s military record contained insufficient evidence to confirm the circumstances and facts surrounding his discharge. Absent the documentation, there is a presumption of regularity in which the applicant was afforded due process and the discharge was consistent with procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge. A thorough review of the applicant’s personnel records reveals that his DD Form 214 reflects a correct separation date of 12 Aug 82. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIM defers to the Board for a final decision regarding the applicant’s request to change block 17 of his DD Form 214 to reflect zero. The applicant states the 11.5 days of leave listed in block 17 of his DD Form 214 was never sold back. The applicant did not provide an AF Form 988, Leave Request/Authorization to substantiate his claim of using 11.5 days as terminal leave. The complete DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSIMC recommends denial of his request to add the Basic Parachutist Course. The applicant served as an active duty Air Force Executive Support Officer as well as an Aircraft Maintenance Specialist. The applicant’s record does not contain any documentation indicating he was placed on jump status or completed the Airborne Training course. IAW Army Regulation 672-5-1, Military Awards, the Parachutist Badge is awarded for successful completion of airborne training. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 23 Mar 12 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office has received no response. _________________________________________________________________ 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 took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 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-2011-03470 in Executive Session on 1 May 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Aug 11. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPSOS, Letter, dated 15 Feb 12. Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPSIM, Letter, dated 27 Feb 12. Exhibit E. HQ AFPC/DPSIMC, Letter, dated 19 Mar 12. Exhibit F. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 23 Mar 12.