RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02094 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 “Convenience of the Government” or “Reduction in Work Force”. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His DD Form 214 was incorrectly coded and it is unjust because he was pushed out of his career field and the Air Force due to manning levels. He was very young and impressionable airman; he did what he was told and only recently did he discover his DD Form 214 was wrong. When he joined the Air Force, he elected to serve in a critically manned career field: Air Traffic Control. The fact the career field was “Critically Manned” forced the Air Force to push too many airmen through school which resulted in a bottle neck effect at the installation level. Individual bases had too many trainees and the trainers could not properly train all of them. He got caught up in this situation and regretfully was forced out of the career field and ultimately the Air Force. His narrative reason for separation should never have reflected “miscellaneous reasons”. He is now working to secure a VA home loan; however, the Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) is wrongfully denying his request based on the erroneous information listed on his DD Form 214. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 16 Nov 11. On 16 Nov 12, the applicant’s commander suspended his Air Traffic Control certificate and restricted him from performing duties associated with that AFSC. The applicant opted not to submit a statement on his behalf and agreed with the proposed action. On 18 Dec 12, the Command Air Traffic Control Functional Manager reviewed and approved the applicant’s withdrawal from the career field. On 2 Jul 13, the applicant was reclassified from a 1C131 to 9A000. The applicant acknowledged he was ineligible for promotion, reenlistment, and reassignment while withdrawn from training. He further understood he had 30 days to submit a retraining application. On 30 Aug 13, the applicant was furnished an Honorable discharge, and was credited with 1 year, 9 months, and 15 days of active service. The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects he was released from active duty with a Narrative Reason for Separation of “Miscellaneous/General Reasons”. The applicant is currently serving in the Air National Guard in the grade of Senior Airman. 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. The applicant contends that he was involuntarily discharged based on being in an over manned career field, therefore, a reduction in force caused his separation. The applicant is incorrect with this assessment. They reviewed the applicant’s request for separation and records show that he failed to successfully complete the required certifications in his career field, Air Traffic Control, (AFSC: 1C131). As a result, he was disqualified from the career field and placed into a retraining status for placement into a different career field. Instead of retraining the applicant requested to separate. His request was approved and he was released from active duty. Therefore, the SPD code and narrative reason for separation are correct as indicated on the applicant’s DD Form 214. 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 15 Sep 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, 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-2015-02094 in Executive Session on 9 Dec 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-02094 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 May 15, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 24 Jul 15. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Sep 15.