RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02098

 						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be provided a DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He does not have a DD Form 214 for his period of active duty service from 18 September 1967 to 18 September 1971.  

He provides a letter from AFPC/DPSIRP dated 28 April 2015, which states a review of his official military personnel file revealed a copy of his DD Form 214 was not on file.  The applicant was advised to submit a DD Form 149, Application for Correction of Military Record.  

In support of his request, he provides copies of Special Order AB-33, dated 13 August 1970, reflecting his promotion to the grade of Sergeant (Sgt, E-4) with effective date and Date of Rank (DOR) of 1 June 1970; and DD Form 4, Enlistment Record – Armed Forces of the United States, reflecting his date of enlistment as 18 September 1967.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s Master Personnel Record (MPR) includes a DD Form 4 reflecting his enlistment on 18 September 1967 and promotion order reflecting his promotion to the grade of Sgt on 1 June 1970; however, it does not include a DD Form 214 or another document to indicate a Date of Separation (DOS) or characterization of service.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs), which are attached at Exhibits C, D and E.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR states if the Board can substantiate and confirm a term of military service, the directive instrument itself may provide relief in the absence of a DD Form 214.  A review of the applicant’s military records maintained at the National Personnel Record Center (NPRC) did not contain sufficient documentation to create a DD Form 214.  

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

AFPC/DP2LT states without a DOS, they cannot verify the applicant’s period of service for a DD Form 214.  A review of the documents provided reflects he enlisted into the Air Force on 18 September 1967.  Although he enlisted for a four year term, that in itself does not establish an actual DOS which is needed to accomplish a DD Form 214.  Therefore, DP2LT is unable to determine his DOS, Expiration of Term of Service (ETS) or the characterization of service.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2LT evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DP3ST states they are unable to make a recommendation or determination of the applicant’s Reentry (RE) code without the date and circumstance of his separation.

The applicant’s available military documents are extremely limited.  There are no documents available in his records to verify when and under what circumstances he was separated.  The applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserves on 26 June 1967 for six years and enlisted in the Regular Air Force for four years on 18 September 1967 establishing his DOS as 17 September 1971.  The last known date the applicant was on active duty was 1 June 1970, the date of his promotion to the grade of Sgt.  It could be reasonably presumed he did not have a break in service from his date of entry (18 September 1967) through his date of promotion (1 June 1970).  Although there is nothing in his records to confirm this presumption, his promotion to the grade of Sgt appears to be in line with the normal time in service promotion advancement for that grade.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP3ST evaluation is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 13 September 2016 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F).  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.  While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years ago, in our view, the reasonable date of discovery of the alleged error or injustice was more than three years ago and the application is therefore untimely.  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.   The applicant requests he be issued a DD Form 214 and provides copies of his DD Form 4 and promotion order to the grade of Sgt as proof of his military service.  While we agree the evidence indicates the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force and served a period of active duty, we regret the information provided and contained in his official military records is insufficient for us to recommend he be issued a DD Form 214.  It is unfortunate, and we do not know why, the applicant is not in possession of his DD Form 214 and a copy is not in his master personnel records; however, completion of a DD Form 214 is not viable without evidence to substantiate his DOS, type of separation, RE code, narrative reason for separation and characterization of service.  Accordingly, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs) and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not sustained his burden of proof that he has been the victim of an error or injustice.  However, should the applicant submit additional documentation to substantiate his period of active duty service and characterization of service, we would be willing to reconsider his request.  In view of the above and 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-2015-02098 in Executive Session on 6 October 2016 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	 , Panel Chair
	 , Member
	 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 May 2015, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 14 April 2016.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP2LT, dated 22 April 2016.
	Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP3ST, dated 27 May 2016.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 September 2016.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.