RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

      IN THE MATTER OF:		DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-01152
		COUNSEL:  NONE
			  		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to serve in the military.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His active-duty training sessions in the Air National Guard (ANG) were above par with regards to his performance and dedication.  He is not providing an excuse for missing drills but he lived three hours away and had a time-consuming job and now wants to serve again. 

In support of his request, applicant submits copies of NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service; memorandums, Certificates of Recognition/Excellence and Achievement and his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Data extracted from the applicant’s military personnel records reflect he enlisted in the ANG on 17 May 2004.

On 5 October 2005, his commander signed a Notification of Intent to Discharge letter and recommended he be discharged with a general discharge.  The letter was sent to his last known address by certified mail and was returned by the Postal Service as unclaimed.

On 11 February 2006, the 136 Airlift Wing, Staff Judge Advocate (136 AW/SJA) reviewed the case for legal sufficiency and stated the applicant had nine or more unexcused absences. The SJA concurred with the commander’s recommendation and recommended a (general) under honorable conditions discharge.

IAW AFI 36-3209 Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, a member is discharged for unsatisfactory participation when the commander concerned determines a member has no potential for useful service under conditions of full mobilization.  Further, a member may be discharged after accumulating nine or more unexcused absences from unit training assemblies (UTAs) within a 12-month period.

Effective 7 May 2006, the applicant was discharged in the grade of senior airman (E-4) with service characterized as (general) under honorable conditions.  Block 26, “Reenlistment Eligibility” on his NGB Form 22, reflects “Ineligible.”

He served 2 years, 11 months and 9 days of service.

_______________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ NGB/A1POE recommends denial.  A1POE states on 7 May 2006 the applicant was discharged from the Texas ANG for unsatisfactory participation.  All policies and procedures within the administrative discharge process were adhered to.  Although he claims he was never notified, the state sent notification via certified mail to the address maintained in the personnel data system.  It is the individual's responsibility to maintain valid contact information.  Failure to locate a member is also a valid reason for administrative discharge.   He simply stopped participating in UTAs while he had a contractual commitment to participate.  Reenlistment eligibility determination is solely at the discretion of the commander who made the natural decision to deem the member “Ineligible.”  The fact that he now wishes to join the military has no bearing on the accuracy of the documentation of his prior service. 

The complete A1POE evaluation is at Exhibit B.

HQ NGB/A1PS recommends denial and concurs with the subject matter expert.

The complete A1PS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 22 May 2009 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response (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 to warrant changing his reenlistment eligibility.  We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case, however; we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 an 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 the application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2009-01152 in Executive Session on 8 July 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		, Panel Chair
		, Member
		, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 March 2009, w/atchs. 
	Exhibit B.  Letter, NGB/A1POE, dated 6 May 2009.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 13 May 2009.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 May 2009.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair
3