RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-03020

	COUNSEL: NONE
	 
	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, dated 26 June 1960, be changed to coincide with his legally changed name.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was adopted so he changed his name to restore his birth family’s name.  His Veterans Affairs (VA) loan application is being delayed until he submit a corrected DD Form 214 showing his 1983 name change.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former Air Force airman second class (E-3).

On 9 December 1983, according to documentation provided by the applicant, a Decree Changing Name, was filed and issued by the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, which reflects the applicant’s change of name.  

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B, the SAF/MR memorandum at Exhibit C, and the advisories at Exhibits E and F.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

SAF/MR memorandum, Guidance to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records, dated 9 March 15, states that while the Board generally has the authority to correct an applicant’s records to reflect a legal change in the applicant’s name, it should exercise discretion in doing so.  In the past, the Board has rarely corrected a record to reflect a name change when the record in question was accurate at the time it was produced.  The Board may choose to depart from this precedent when the facts or equities can be distinguished from past denials and the applicant demonstrates that allowing the DD Form 214 to remain uncorrected would constitute an injustice.  The DD Form 214 is primarily created for the benefit of the veteran to establish entitlements to various government programs, or in seeking employment with organizations that grant veteran’s preferences.  A name change on the DD Form 214 may constitute an injustice when the veteran asserts that presenting a DD Form 214 that lists the old name effectively requires a needlessly intrusive explanation of personal history.  This type of injustice may arise in situations such as when the name change is transgender-related or associated with a divorce.  Therefore, correction of an applicant’s name on a DD Form 214 is a reasonable outcome only when the applicant clearly demonstrates that allowing the DD Form 214 to remain uncorrected would constitute an injustice.
A complete copy of the SAF/MR guidance is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the SAF/MR guidance to the applicant on 27 September 2016 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP2SSM recommends denying the application.  In accordance with Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3202, Separation Documents, the DD Form 214 will provide an accurate and complete summation of active military personnel service.  The governing directives do not provide authority to change the contents of the DD Form 214 that have an effective date after the close out date of the document and did not occur during the period of recorded military service.  The effective date of the name change is after the effective date of the period of service recorded on the DD Form 214.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit E.

AFPC/DP2STM recommends denying the application.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects his name at the time of discharge.  In accordance with Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2608, Military Personnel Records System, the records of former members should not be corrected to show name changes that occurred after discharge.  After review of the applicant’s official military personnel file it shows he enlisted, served and was discharged under his former name, which is correctly reflected on his DD Form 214. The complete advisory is at Exhibit F.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 11 September 2017 for comment (Exhibit G), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error and injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP2SSM and AFPC/DP2STM and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-03020 in Executive Session on 22 May 2018:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-03020:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 26 July 2016.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Memorandum Name Change Guidance, SAF/MR, dated 9 March 2015.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Name Change Guidance to applicant, dated 27 September 2016.
Exhibit E:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2SSM, dated 3 November 2016.
Exhibit F:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2STM, dated 17 August 2017.
Exhibit G:	Letter, AFBCMR, dated 11 September 2017.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.