RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04184
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
________________________________________________________________
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.
He be credited with good and satisfactory Unit Training
Assembly (UTA) days from his enlistment in Sep 2008 to present.
He be promoted to the grade of technical sergeant (TSgt, E-6).
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His first sergeant was assisting him update his status so he
would be performing drill/UTA for points only. He did not want
to receive drill pay because he was receiving Department of
Veterans Affairs (DVA) benefits.
He was deemed to be medically disqualified without a physical.
He was never notified of pending discharge actions, and 00the RE
code he was given prevents him from enlisting in any branch of
service in the future.
He was told by his commander that he was discharged because of
his disability. He had the same disability when he initially
joined the Air National Guard (ANG) in 2008.
He has since reenlisted into the 113th District of Washington ANG
(DCANG) with the same RE code, which technically should have
prevented him from reenlisting.
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of NGB
22, Report of Separation and Record of Service; DD Form 4, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United
States; Addendum to DD Form 4; NGB Form 438, Honorable Discharge
certificate, and electronic communiqués.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the ANG in the grade of
staff sergeant (E-5).
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application,
extracted from the applicants military records, are contained
in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air
Force at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1POE recommends denial. A1POE states, they contacted the
113th Force Support Squadron and were informed the applicant was
erroneously discharged from the 113th DCANG; however he has since
reenlisted into the organization effective 15 Sep 2011.
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. He did not accrue the
required 50 points towards a satisfactory year in either year;
therefore, A1POE cannot recommend he receive points to effect a
good year during the period he was erroneously discharged.
In regards to his request for promotion to TSgt, A1POE states,
the commander did not initiate promotion paperwork for the
applicant. Moreover, he did not have any satisfactory
participation years while assigned to the unit, which leads
A1POE to conclude the commander, would not have recommended him
for a promotion.
The complete A1POE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
NGB/A1PS concurs with A1POEs advisory, and therefore, does not
recommend the applicants requested relief.
The complete A1PS evaluation is at Exhibit D.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 20 Mar 2012, copies of the Air Force evaluations were
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within
30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this
office (Exhibit E).
________________________________________________________________
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
correcting his records to reflect credit for satisfactory UTA
days or that he be promoted to the grade of TSgt. 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error or
injustice. Regarding his request to change his RE code, A1POE
has advised that they will administratively correct his record
by removing the applicants erroneous RE code of 6H. Aside from
the administrative correction noted above, we find no basis to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel
will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s)
involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably
considered.
________________________________________________________________
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 this application
in Executive Session on 10 May 2012, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2011-04184:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Oct 2011, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1POE, dated 22 Feb 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 29 Feb 2012
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 20 Mar 2012.
Panel Chair
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-00396
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00396 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “6H” (Pending Discharge IAW ANGR 39-10 – INVOL (ANG Only)) be changed to allow her to enlist in the Army National Guard. On 12 Apr 08, the applicant’s commander notified her that he was recommending her...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01594
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01594 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 6H (Drug Abuse) be changed to a 1 so she can reenlist. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03031
JA states that based on the facts presented in the NGB opinions, JA finds their responses to be legally sufficient and concurs with the recommendations to deny the applicant's requests for corrective action related to ACP payments, Board# V0611A, AGR separation from ANG Selective Retention Review Board (SRRB) consideration, and TERA. Counsels complete response is at Exhibit N. _______________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PF...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-02538
He questions how his personal medical costs are going to be addressed by the military since no MTF treatment was provided. A Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was initiated in February, 2006. Not having the opportunity to complete medical treatment or care, an MEB should consider all of his medical diagnoses, conditions and treatments.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00849
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. 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...