RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04047

					COUNSEL:  NONE

					HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Home or Record (HOR) be corrected to reflect North Carolina 
on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from 
Active Duty.  


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He lived in North Carolina prior to joining the military.  His 
DD Form 214 currently reflects is HOR Fallbrook, CA.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 
7 Jun 05.

The applicant was discharged with an honorable characterization 
of service on 9 May 15, and was credited with 9 years, 
11 months, and 3 days of active 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:

AFPC/DPSIPE recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  The DD Form 4, 
Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United 
States, is the source document for HOR.  AFPC Enlisted 
Accessions Branch confirmed that the member initialed his DD 
Form 4, listing Fallbrook, CA as his HOR.  The Joint Federal 
Travel Regulation (JFTR), Volume 1, Appendix A1, Part 1, states, 
“The place recorded as the home of the individual when 
reinstated, reappointed, or reenlisted remains the same as that 
recorded when commissioned, appointed, enlisted, or inducted, or 
ordered into the tour of active duty, unless there is a break in 
service of more than one full day.  Only if a break in service 
exceeds one full day; may the member change the HOR.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIPE evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 25 Feb 15, for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.


THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.  The application 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.


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-2014-04047 in Executive Session on 11 Jun 15, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-04047 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Sep 14.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIPE, dated 15 Dec 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Feb 15.