RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04798 COUNSEL:	NONE
HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He	be	issued	a	new	DD	Form	214,	Certificate	of	Release	or	
Discharge	from	Active	Duty,	that	does	not	say	Retirement:	
disability, temporary.			

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His lack of a new DD 214 is preventing him from participating in the military buyback for the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 20 Jun 74, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.
On 14 May 94, the applicant he was released from the Air Force and placed on the TDRL, with an effective date of 15 May 94, and was credited with 19 years, 10 months, and 24 days of active service.

On 7 Oct 95, he was removed from the TDRL and placed the Permanent Disability Retired List.

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/DPFD recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. On 7 Oct 95, the applicant was removed from the TDRL and permanently retired with a disability rating of 60%. When a member is removed from the TDRL, a new DD Form 214 is not issued, or corrected, since the time spent on TDRL is not active duty time.  Rather, a new order is issued indicating the

service member’s final status. This order becomes a permanent part of  the  service  record  and  should  be  attached  to  the DD Form 214 reflecting the final disposition was removal from the TDRL and permanently retired. As no error or injustice occurred during the processing of applicant’s disability case file, nor during his removal of the TDRL, it is recommended to deny the applicant’s request for a corrected DD Form 214.

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

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluations was forwarded to the applicant on 6 Mar 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 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 opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 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-2014-04798 in Executive Session on 26 Aug 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, received 24 Nov 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.	Memorandum, AFPC/DPFD, 29 Jan 14 (sic) 2015. Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Mar 15.
1 2