RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05460 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation (Miscellaneous/General Reasons) and corresponding separation code of “KND” be changed to reflect voluntary separation from the Air Force under a reduction in force program. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was voluntarily separated from the Air Force under the reduction in force program while he was a first term airman. His character of service was honorable and he would like his narrative reason for separation to reflect the same. The applicant provides no documentation in support of his appeal. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 3 December 2002. AF IMT 31, Airman’s Request for Early Separation – Separation Based on Change in Service Obligation, reflects that on 9 June 2004, the applicant requested separation under the Limited Active Duty Service Commitment (LADSC) Waiver Program – Force Shaping Program Phase II. The applicant was honorably discharged on 15 August 2004 in the grade of airman first class under the provisions of AFI 36- 3208 (Miscellaneous/General Reasons). He served 1 year, 8 months and 13 days on active duty. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. DPSOR state the applicant’s date of separation was approved IAW MPFM 04-35. MPFM 04-05, attachment 2, states that the LADSC Waiver Program allows officers and enlisted personnel to either retire or separate prior to completing specified ADSC’s or service commitments inclusive of normal DOS/ETS. Personnel who separate will do so under the miscellaneous provision of AFI 36-3208. The narrative reason for separation of “Miscellaneous/General Reasons” is the correct narrative reason for separation. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the separation processing. The applicant provided no facts warranting a change to his separation action. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states he is currently a GS-13 working for the Department of State. When he initiated this request he was a GS-12 working for the Department of the Navy and was seeking new employment. During interviews with the Department of Defense – his discharge was questioned – the interviewer felt that “general reasons” did not satisfactorily explain his separation; they believed it should reflect voluntary separation under a reduction in force program. His narrative reason for separation made it incredibly difficult to compete for a promotional position within the federal government. Also, he was not informed that he would not be eligible for the Montgomery GI Bill, or the VA Housing Loan, upon separation due to individual length of service requirements. He is able to take advantage of partial education benefits. Unless the narrative reason for separation is changed to reflect that he voluntarily separated he is not eligible for the VA Housing Loan. The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ _ 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 an injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission to include his rebuttal comments in judging the merits of the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred during the discharge process. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. The applicant has provided no evidence, which would lead us to believe the narrative reason for separation was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation. Therefore, 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 failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence of an error or injustice. 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 the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an 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-2012-05460 in Executive Session on 4 September 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-05460 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 November 2012. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 29 January 2013, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 February 2013. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, 20 August 2013, w/atch. 2 3