RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03524 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Home of Record (HOR) be changed from Mentor, Minnesota to XXXXXXX, Texas. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He has been a Texas resident since his discharge from the Air Force and would like his HOR to reflect Texas. The fact that Texas is not reflected as his HOR is preventing his son from qualifying for education opportunities under the Hazlewood Act. His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 29 Jul 1988. His DD Form 4, Enlistment - Reenlistment Document, reflects Mentor, Minnesota as his HOR. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DPSIPE recommends denial. DPSIPE states that Joint Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR) Volume I, Appendix A, states in part that a HOR is the place recorded as the individual’s home when commissioned, appointed, enlisted, inducted, or ordered into a tour of active duty. Any correction must be fully justified and the home, as corrected, must be the member’s actual home upon entering the Service, and not a different place selected for the member's convenience. In accordance with AFI 36-2608, Military Personnel Records System, DD Form 4 is the source document for HOR. The applicant's initial DD Form 4 reflects Mentor, Minnesota as the city/state in which he lived prior to entering the Air Force and has been consistently listed throughout his military records as his HOR. The complete DPSIPE evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 10 Sep 2012, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ 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 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 or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 this application in Executive Session on 9 May 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC- 2012-03524: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Aug 2012, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIPE, dated 28 Aug 2012, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Sep 2012. Panel Chair