RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03610
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His separation code (SPD) on his NGB Form 22, Record of Service
in the Air National Guard, be changed from an entry-level
performance/misconduct to a favorable separation code.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
1. He never actually served in the Michigan Air National Guard
(ANG); however, he was given 5 years of service and an entry-
level separation. He did not realize until recently that he
could request to have the SPD changed and he did not know that
the SPD code was a code for misconduct, which will affect any
possible future federal employment and/or reenlistment into the
Armed Forces.
2. In Jun 03, after being separated from the Army and having knee
surgery, he was still interested in serving with the Armed
Forces. He spoke to a recruiter with the ANG who told him his
separation was not a problem since he only served for four
months; however, he may need a waiver because of his knee
surgery.
3. In late 2005 or early 2006, he received a packet notifying him
of his involuntary separation for failing to attend basic
training. The packet contained a letter asking him if he would
like to seek military or civilian counsel. At that time he did
not think anything of it and sent the forms back declining
counsel. He had no contact with any personnel from Selfridge
ANGB or the ANG.
4. In Jun 08, a few years after he received the packet stating he
was being discharged from the ANG, he received yet another packet
from the ANG. 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. He did not
question any of the documentation from the ANG until he spoke
with a recruiter regarding his quest of joining the ANG. The
discharge does not make sense to him because the ANG requested
his discharge in 2005, yet retained him until 2008 before
actually discharging him. He was also told that his unit of
assignment should have contacted him to find out why he did not
show up for drills; however, no one ever contacted him. He never
received any pay or military benefits from the ANG.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his
NGB Form 22, a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty, a copy of his involuntary discharge
package, a copy of his congressional inquiry, and a personal
statement.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted into the ANG on 19 Jun 03; however, he
never went to basic military training (BMT).
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of
the Air Force, which is at Exhibit B and C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1POE recommends denial. 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 applicants behalf.
A1POE provides a copy of the applicants DD Form 4, Record of
Military Processing Armed Forces of the United States, which
validates he enlisted into the Michigan ANG.
The complete NGB/A1POE evaluation is at Exhibit B.
NGB/A1PS recommends denial. A1PS concurs with NGB/A1POE that the
applicants discharge was accomplished in accordance with Air
Force policies and procedures, and no evidence was provided to
show an error or injustice.
The complete NGB/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 6 Mar 12 for review and comment within 30 days. As
of this date, this office has received no 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 opinions and recommendations
of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt
their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that 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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2011-03610 in Executive Session on 17 Apr 12, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence for Docket Number BC-2011-03610
was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Sep 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/A1POE, dated 14 Feb 12.
Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 15 Feb 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Mar 12.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00585
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00585 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The authority and reason for his separation, separation program designator (SPD) code, and reenlistment eligibility, as reflected on his NGB Form 22, National Guard Bureau Report of Separation and Record of Service, be changed so that he may...
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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-00209
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00209 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code be changed to one that will allow him to re-enter the military. The Medical Consultant lauds the applicants desire to once again serve, and the support he has received from his parents, an employer, his youth pastor, and a...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04692
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04325
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04325 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Date of Rank (DOR), of his promotion to Major, O-4, be changed from 13 October 2012, to 2 March 2012. He subsequently met another promotion board on 13 October 2013. He was selected and processed for promotion on a later list and was promoted...
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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-05966
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05966 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code on his NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, be changed from 6U (Air National Guard (ANG) Not Selected for Retention by the Commander) to 6A (ANG Eligible to Reenlist/Extend Selected by...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01152
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 | 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 | 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. ...