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 applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Data extracted from the applicants 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 commanders 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 applicants 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
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04827
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04827 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code 6H, which denotes Pending Discharge in accordance with ANGR 39-10 Involuntary (ANG Only), be removed from his records. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04134
AFI 36- 320, Paragraph 3.13.2.1.1, actually states Member may be discharged when the member has accumulated nine or more unexcused absences from UTA within a 12-month period. The documents provided indicate the applicant was given a three month leave of absence (LOA) in March of 1997 to attend to personal business and, was due to return to UTAs in July 1997. The AFI states a member may be discharged and does not state the member must be discharged. We took notice of the applicant's...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04184
A1POE states, in accordance with the applicants point credit summary, he did not participate in enough UTA days from his initial enlistment date of 20 Sep 2008 to the date of the erroneous discharge, on 1 Aug 2010. ________________________________________________________________ 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;...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02758
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He served honorably for 2 years in the Air National Guard (ANG). The NGB/A1PS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 27 Aug 10 for review and comment within 30 days. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03610
This time enclosed was a NGB 22, stating that he was discharged with 5 years and 11 days of service and that he was eligible for reenlistment into the Armed Forces. After reviewing the applicants discharge notification package, dated 22 Mar 06, it was validated that the member was recommended for discharge for failing to maintain contact with the unit to schedule a date to attend BMT or attend Unit Training Assembly (UTA) weekends, which constituted substandard performance on the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04167
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04167 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. As such, the applicant was erroneously separated from the Air National Guard and incurred a debt for his reenlistment bonus. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was a member of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01525
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01525 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Although the applicant is requesting his DD Form 214 be amended, it appears he is actually requesting his NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, issued in conjunction with his 9 September 1990 separation...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02315
In addition, members are ordered to attend UTA unless they have an authorized excuse for absence. Counsel states the applicant absented himself from weekend drills so that he could work other higher paying jobs. However, it should be noted that many traditional guard members give up the opportunity to earn more money on UTA weekends. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-01596
On 10 Dec 10, NGB/A1PS informed the applicant that he had not exhausted the administrative remedies regarding his application for correction of his military records. 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 offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01044
His retired pay is based on 2,680 retirement points and over 33 years of service for basic pay in the grade of technical sergeant. The complete DPP evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and provided copies of documents associated with the events cited in his appeal. After a thorough review of the available evidence and the...