Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01849
Original file (BC-2005-01849.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01849
            INDEX CODE:  110.03

            COUNSEL:  VICTOR KELLEY

            HEARING DESIRED: YES



_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His record be corrected to show:

            a. His reinstatement to his former technical job with  the
Alabama Air National Guard (ALANG), or in the alternative, that he  be
allowed to appeal his commander’s decision  to  remove  him  from  his
aircraft mechanic position.

            b. His transfer to the Retired Reserve with all rights and
privileges thereto.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While on temporary duty (TDY) with the ALANG in  Turkey,  he  lawfully
purchased 21 shotguns which he brought back to the United States on  4
March 2002.  He claimed only 10 of the shotguns  on  a  customs  form.
According to court records, by  not  claiming  all  the  guns  in  his
possession  he  underpaid  his  tariff  fees  by  $192.00.    He   was
consequently indicted and pleaded guilty to smuggling merchandise into
the United States.  At his sentencing hearing on  6  March  2003,  the
Court was forced to use Federal sentencing guidelines that resulted in
him being sentenced to 12 months  and  1  day  of  incarceration.   It
should be noted that on 5 November 2001, well in advance of the  above
events, he had been notified by the Department of the Air  Force  that
he was eligible for Reserve retirement at age 60.

On  18  December  2002,  his  commander   recommended   administrative
separation from the ANG with a service characterization of Under Other
Than Honorable Conditions  (UOTHC).   Subsequently,  he  submitted  an
application for transfer to the Retired  Reserve  that  he  failed  to
sign.  On 16 May 2003, his commander notified him by  memorandum  that
his application needed  to  be  signed  and  returned.   However,  the
memorandum was sent to the wrong address and he never received it.  On
19 May 2003, his commander placed him in a non-duty status and  barred
him from access to the base.  On 11 June 2003, his commander  directed
he be removed  from  his  military  technician  position  of  aircraft
mechanic.  On 14 July 2003, he began his incarceration.

Notwithstanding that his command had originally intended to refer  him
to an administrative separation board with a recommendation he receive
an UOTHC discharge, on 4 August 2003, he was honorably discharged from
the ALANG.  After his release  from  incarceration  in  May  2004,  he
immediately initiated contact  with  military  authorities  requesting
transfer to the Retired Reserve  as  should  have  been  done  a  year
earlier.  He  was  told  to  submit  an  application  to  the  AFBCMR.
Attempts by the applicant  and  his  counsel  to  contact  his  former
commander and Judge Advocate (JA) personnel at his  former  unit  have
either gone unanswered or, in the case of the JA, he was again advised
to submit application to the  AFBCMR.   Due  process  and  fundamental
fairness require that he should have been  given  the  opportunity  to
respond to the commander’s notification.

In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a statement  from
counsel and  copies  of  court  documents,  his  20-year  letter,  his
commander’s  various  recommendations   for   involuntary   separation
including a request to place him in a  non-duty  status,  a  debarment
letter, removal from his technician position and  honorable  discharge
action as well as pertinent  email  trails,  correspondence  from  his
counsel and a copy of  a  DD  Form  214,  Certificate  of  Release  or
Discharge from Active Duty.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the ANG on 5 August 1981 and  was  progressively
promoted to the grade of technical sergeant with a date of rank  of  3
January 1996.  On 5 November 2001, he was notified of his  eligibility
for retired pay at age 60.  On 27 September 2002, he was indicted by a
Grand Jury for violating Title 18 United States Code Section 545.   He
entered into a plea agreement wherein he would plead guilty  to  Count
One of the indictment and, on 8 May 2003, was sentenced  to  one  year
and one day to be served in  Federal  prison.   On  9  May  2003,  his
commander requested approval to place him in a  non-duty  status  with
pay.  Also on 9 May 2003, he was officially  debarred  from  the  base
until further notice and would not be allowed access  without  written
permission.  He applied for transfer to the Retired Reserve in lieu of
further processing of administrative discharge for cause  asking  that
his transfer be effective 31 December  2003.   On  16  May  2003,  his
commander notified him his application  to  transfer  to  the  Retired
Reserve was not signed and he was given until 27 May 2003 to submit  a
signed application.  On 11 June 2003, he was removed from his military
technician position as a jet engine mechanic.  He  began  serving  his
sentence on 14  July  2003.   On  4  August  2003,  he  was  honorably
discharged from the ALANG after having served for 22 years.





AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ANG/A1POF states contact with the ALANG revealed that had a signed  AF
Form 131, Application for Transfer to the Retired  Reserve,  it  would
have been processed.   The  Headquarters  AL  National  Guard  has  no
objection to the applicant’s transfer to the Retired Reserve and A1POF
therefore recommends relief be granted.   However,  the  loss  of  his
membership in the ALANG and  his  military  technician  position  were
accomplished through proper discharge proceedings and A1POF recommends
relief for his reinstatement be denied.

A1POF’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Counsel for the applicant disagrees with the ANG’s  finding  that  his
client’s loss of his military and military technician  positions  with
the ALANG  was  accomplished  through  proper  discharge  proceedings.
Counsel argues the applicant was not afforded proper due  process  and
that should the Board not recommend reinstatement that he be given the
right to respond to  his  commander’s  notification  and  the  command
revisit the subject of his original removal once  the  command  is  in
compliance with its own regulations.

Applicant’s complete response is at 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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice regarding his transfer to the  Retired
Reserve.  It appears the applicant applied for transfer to the Retired
Reserve prior to his discharge, but his application  was  not  signed.
However, the  Headquarters  of  the  Alabama  National  Guard  has  no
objection to the applicant’s transfer to the Retired Reserve  and  the
Air National Guard Headquarters  concurs  with  the  States  position.
Therefore, the Board recommends the applicant’s records  be  corrected
as indicated below.

4.  Regarding his request he be reinstated to his former position with
the ALANG, it should  be  noted  the  Board  lacks  the  authority  to
reinstate the applicant back to his position within the  Air  National
Guard.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was discharged from
the Alabama Air National Guard effective 29 December 2003, transferred
to the Individual  Ready  Reserve  effective  30  December  2003,  and
transferred to the Reserve Retired List  effective  31 December  2003,
eligible for retired pay at age 60 under the provisions of  Title  10,
USC, Section 12731.
______________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 26 April 2006, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Panel Chair
      Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 May 05, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Letter, NGB/A1POF, dated 22 Mar 06.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 31 Mar 06.




                                   JAY H. JORDAN
                                   Panel Chair

                         DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
                                WASHINGTON DC


[pic]
Office Of The Assistant Secretary



AFBCMR BC-2005-01849




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he was
discharged from the Alabama Air National Guard effective 29 December
2003, transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve effective 30
December 2003, and transferred to the Retired Reserve List effective
31 December 2003 eligible for retired pay at age 60 under the
provisions of Title 10, USC, Section 12731.





     JOE G. LINEBERGER

     Director

     Air Force Review Boards Agency


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02974

    Original file (BC-2005-02974.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He had been promoted to the Reserve grade of major in 1997 and had retained that rank up to his transfer to the Retired Reserve. On 3 November 2003, he applied for transfer to the Retired Reserve. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03580

    Original file (BC-2005-03580.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, because he was considered a two-time passover for promotion to lieutenant colonel, he was notified he would be retired as required by law effective 1 April 2001. He did not complete the training because of his retirement from military service effective 1 April 2001. The particular member was never the applicant’s supervisor and his duties and responsibilities at the time were far- removed from the applicants.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02314

    Original file (BC-2005-02314.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02314 INDEX CODE: 125.00, 145.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His military medical records be changed to show his medical condition, right paracentral disc protrusion L 4-5, was aggravated by military service as determined by a Report of Investigation (ROI) of his Line of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00702

    Original file (BC-2005-00702.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation of this interview will serve as a record of the member's intent to reenlist at ETS as well as the unit commander's selection for reenlistment. DPFOC notes the commander did not recommend the applicant for reenlistment. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00746

    Original file (BC-2006-00746.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Prior to being released on 26 June 2004, he requested additional orders so he may remain on active duty until the MEB had heard his case and made a final decision on it. ______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was not released from active duty with the Air National Guard on 21 January 2006, but was continued on active duty...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02488

    Original file (BC-2005-02488.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02488 INDEX CODE: 125.00, 145.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 23 May 2003 discharge be revoked and he be allowed to remain on active duty with all pay and allowances until such time as HQ Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) has made a final determination regarding his medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01178

    Original file (BC-2006-01178.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01178 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: Michael J. Calabro HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be corrected to show that all: a. The ADB recommendation for his characterization of service was not consistent with his military record. He was never told why he was not afforded his rights or why...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00639

    Original file (BC-2005-00639.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, his name had already appeared on the Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act (ROPMA) Mandatory Promotion List prior to him meeting the time in grade (TIG) requirement for a Unit Vacancy (UV) promotion. In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided promotion orders to first lieutenant and captain, and the fiscal year 2004 (FY04) Reserve of the Air Force Line and Nonline Captain Promotion Selection Boards results. He was commissioned in the Louisiana ANG (LAANG) on 20 August...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-00343

    Original file (BC-2003-00343.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Second, he is concerned the Board might consider not granting his request to correct the known errors on the SF-50B as the Board may only correct military records - not civilian records. Based on the evidence of record, had the applicant not been separated, he would have continued to serve in the Air National Guard (ANG). We note applicant’s request that he be promoted to lieutenant colonel three years from the date of the Board.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00685

    Original file (BC-2013-00685.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 3 Aug 10, the Vice Chief of Joint Staff signed an order amending the applicant’s separation from the ANG and transfer to the Air Force Reserve to reflect his discharge from the WYANG and as a Reserve of the Air Force effective 10 Oct 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-3209, para 2.25.2, ANG Unique Separations. In addition, no one had the authority to discharge the applicant from the Reserve of the Air Force (See SAF/IG Report at Exhibit B). According to AFI 36-3209, “the authority to...