Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00849
Original file (BC-2010-00849.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00849 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His reenlistment code of “ineligible” be changed to allow him 
reentry into the Air National Guard (ANG). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He has a “1” reenlistment code and would like to reenlist with 
his previous ANG unit. 

 

He used the prescription drug Strattera for less than a month 
and he was discharged. 

 

He was on Ritalin as a child while in school; however, he 
thought he would do better in college if he were to take 
Strattera. 

 

He was coded as ineligible for worldwide deployment and he feels 
this was untrue because he was deployed for two months and this 
was three months prior to his discharge. He served eight years 
in the military and never had a problem. 

 

He started college in January 2009 and has made the Dean’s List 
every semester he has attended. He is a member of the Phi Theta 
Kappa (International Honors Society) and has an accumulated 3.58 
grade point average. He has not taken Strattera since 2005. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of 
personal statements, his NGB Form 22, National Guard Bureau 
Report of Separation and Record of Service, an unofficial 
transcript, and a note from his physician. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 


 

Available records indicate the applicant entered the ANG on 
5 Apr 03 and was progressively promoted to the grade of senior 
airman. He was honorably discharged on 18 Nov 05, with the 
narrative reason for discharge as ineligibility for worldwide 
deployment, and “ineligible” for his reenlistment eligibility. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

NGB/A1PS recommends denial and states they concur with 
NGB/A1POE. A1POE states the applicant provides no evidence to 
show an error or injustice occurred. 

 

Further, AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for 
Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, states, 
“separate or discharge an ANG member who is not qualified or 
eligible for worldwide deployment. The commander initiates 
action under this authority upon determination that such 
conditions exist.” Table 3.1, states, “Voluntary or involuntary 
discharge or separation of enlisted personnel” Rule 14 directs 
that members separated under this rule are not board eligible 
and notification procedures listed in Chapter 4 are not 
required.” 

 

The complete NGB/A1PS evaluation, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit B. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 3 Sep 10 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit C). As of this date, this office has not received a 
response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 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 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 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 Docket Number 
BC-2010-00849 in Executive Session on 14 October 2010, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Feb 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 24 Aug 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Sep 10. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02758

    Original file (BC 2010 02758.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2010 | BC-2010-02258

    Original file (BC-2010-02258.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His promotion to the grade of senior airman (E-4) be adjusted to an effective date of 1 February 2009. AFI 10-201 refers the applicant’s career field to the “Prime Ribs Managers Guide.” The mission capabilities statement that was provided with the applicant’s request is from the guide and states “Specific grades denote SORTS critical positions.” The listing only has two positions that have specific grades; both of them are 7-level AFSCs. We took notice of the applicant's complete...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04167

    Original file (BC-2010-04167.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2009 | BC 2009 01152

    Original file (BC 2009 01152.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 October 2005, his commander signed a Notification of Intent to Discharge letter and recommended he be discharged with a general 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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01507

    Original file (BC-2010-01507.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 31 July 2007, the commander notified the member that he was being discharged from the ANG under the provisions of AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, Substandard (Unsatisfactory) Performance. On 31 July 2007, the applicant was honorably discharged from the MI ANG because he failed his end-of-course examination for his CDC twice. ___________________________________________________________ _____ The following members of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04184

    Original file (BC-2011-04184.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A1POE states, in accordance with the applicant’s 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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-03451

    Original file (BC-2011-03451.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PS recommends his NGB Form 22 be changed to reflect a medical separation and denial of a change to the RE code. The complete NGB/A1PS evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant/counsel on 18 Nov 11 for review and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04516

    Original file (BC-2012-04516.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04516 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code 6P (medically disqualified/pending waiver) be changed to allow him to reenter the service. Conditions which may seriously compromise the near-term well-being if an individual were to deploy are disqualifying for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03610

    Original file (BC-2011-03610.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 applicant’s 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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-04692

    Original file (BC-2011-04692.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04692 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 6U (Not Selected for Retention by Commander) be changed to a code that would allow him to reenlist. So should he desire to enlist with another ANG unit, it will not be a barrier to his enlistment. We took notice of the...