RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00067 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation and separation program designator (SPD) code be reviewed. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was discharged under Phase II of the force shaping program; however, his narrative reason for separation and SPD code are incorrectly reflected on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. As a result, he is being precluded from qualifying for a home loan guarantee through the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 3 Jun 03. On 1 Dec 04, he was released from active duty with an honorable character of service and an SPD code of MND and a corresponding narrative reason for separation of “Miscellaneous/General Reasons.” He was credited with 1 year, 5 months, and 29 days of total active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The applicant’s date of separation was approved in accordance with Military Personnel Flight Memorandum (MPFM) 04-35, which states the Limited Active Duty Service Commitment (LADSC) Waiver Program allows officer and enlisted personnel to either retire or separate prior to completing their specified ADSC or service commitment. Personnel who separate under these provisions will do so under the miscellaneous provision of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen. The narrative reason of “Miscellaneous/General reasons” is correct and consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Furthermore, the applicant has not submitted any evidence or identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the separation processing. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOS 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 29 Apr 11 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 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 find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred during the discharge process. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s honorable discharge for miscellaneous/general reasons was consistent with the substantive requirements of the governing instructions. He has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe his honorable discharge under the provisions of the Air Force Force Shaping Program was improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing directive, or the separation program designator code issued in conjunction with his honorable discharge was erroneous or inappropriately assigned. Therefore, absent evidence the applicant was not afforded rights to which he was entitled, there was an abuse of discretionary authority, or appropriate standards were not applied, 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-2011-00067 in Executive Session on 27 Sep 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Dec 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 28 Mar 11. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Apr 11. Panel Chair