RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-00021

		COUNSEL:  

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to change his reenlistment (RE) code 
from "Ineligible" to "Eligible." 

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility status is not accurately reflected 
on his NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service; 
he was not present to sign the form.  

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 28 Feb 02, the applicant enlisted in the California Air 
National Guard (ANG) for a period of six years.  On 22 Nov 05, 
he was honorably discharged and transferred to the Inactive 
Reserve with reenlistment eligibility listed as “Ineligible.”

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1PP recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an 
error or an injustice.  In accordance with ANGI 36-2002, 
Enlistment and Reenlistment in the Air National Guard as a 
Reserve of the Air Force, the term of enlistment for all non-
prior service (NPS) applicants will be for a period of six 
years.  The applicant resigned from his active duty position 
with the state of California and was allowed to separate prior 
to the expiration of his term of service (ETS).  This type of 
separation was used due to the fact the applicant had not 
fulfilled his military service obligation (MSO).  
A commander may approve or deny reenlistments and extension of 
enlistments to any member of his or her command.  Continued 
retention in the ANG is a command prerogative and is not an 
inherent right of any individual unless the member has between 
18 and 20 years of satisfactory service towards a reserve 
retirement.  Although the applicant’s command approved his 
request to separate before completing his MSO, it was at the 
command’s discretion to deny reenlistment.

The applicant not being available to sign the NGB Form 22 does 
not prevent him from being separated or entitle him to be 
eligible for reenlistment. 

A complete copy of the NGB/A1PP 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 Mar 13, 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 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 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 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-2013-00021 in Executive Session on 22 Oct 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Nov 12, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, NGB/A1PP, dated 28 Feb 13.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Mar 13.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair