RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00905 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, be corrected to reflect “Reduction in Force”. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His DD Form 214 does not accurately reflect the reason for his separation. This error is impacting his ability to receive benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). In support of his request, the applicant has submitted a copy of his DD Form 214, AF Form 100, Separation Order and a DVA information sheet. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 18 Jul 90. On 20 May 92, the applicant was furnished an Honorable discharge, and was credited with 1 year, 10 months, and 3 days of active service. The narrative reason for separation reflects Voluntary: Miscellaneous Reasons. 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/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. There is no documentation in the applicant’s personnel record to review regarding the separation process. Absent any documentation, based on the presumption of regularity, the applicant submitted a request for separation under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Miscellaneous Reason, using the AF Form 31. The applicant has not submitted a timely application. It has been 22 years since the applicant separated. In those years, the applicant’s personnel record has become absent of documentation. The applicant failed to explain why the alleged error or injustice was not addressed within the three years from date of discovery. Individuals applying to separate prior to fulfilling their Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) would have been required to voluntarily apply under Miscellaneous/General Reasons. They would also been released from active duty service into the United States Air Force Reserve to finish fulfilling the remainder of their service obligation. This is evident by items 6 and 9 of the applicant’s DD Form 214. Upon separation, the applicant maintained a service obligation through 17 Jul 98. Based on the presumption of regularity, the Separation Processing Designation code, narrative reason for separation and character of service was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR 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 22 Sep 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD: 1. The application was not filed within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or could have been discovered, as required by Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (10 USC 1552), and Air Force Instruction 36-2603. Although the applicant asserts a date of discovery which would, if correct, make the application timely, the essential facts which gave rise to the application were known to applicant long before the asserted date of discovery. Knowledge of those facts constituted the date of discovery and the beginning of the three-year period for filing. Thus, the application is untimely. 2. Paragraph b of 10 USC 1552 permits us, in our discretion, to excuse untimely filing in the interest of justice. We have carefully reviewed applicant's submission and the entire record, and we do not find a sufficient basis to excuse the untimely filing of this application. The applicant has not shown a plausible reason for delay in filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises issues of error or injustice that require resolution on the merits at this time. Accordingly, we conclude that it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the untimely filing of the application. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-00905 in Executive Session on 26 Feb 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Feb 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 16 Apr 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Sep 14.