Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00396
Original file (BC-2012-00396.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
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. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
The RE code 6H is preventing her from enlisting in the Tennessee 
Army  National  Guard.    She  was  notified  that  her  security 
clearance  was  pending  revocation  due  to  her  finances.    She  was 
discharged because she failed to respond in a timely manner.  She 
has since filed bankruptcy and has made arrangements to repay her 
debts. 
 
In  support  of  her  request,  the  applicant  provides  an  expanded 
statement, three character references, a copy of her NGB Form 22, 
Report of Separation and Record of Service. 
 
The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The applicant’s NGB Form 22 reflects she enlisted in the Ohio Air 
National Guard on 3 Oct 05.  She served as an Air Transportation 
Journeyman. 
 
On 12 Apr 08, the applicant’s commander notified her that he was 
recommending her discharge from the Ohio ANG and as a Reserve of 
the  Air  Force  in  the  interest  of  national  security  (failure  to 
maintain  a  security  clearance).    The  specific  reason  for  the 
discharge action was that her security clearance was revoked by 
the  Air  Force  Central  Adjudication  Facility  due  to  financial 
delinquencies. 
 

Her  commander  advised  her  of  her  rights  in  this  matter.    The 
applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification for discharge. 
 
On  12  Sep  08,  the  legal  office  reviewed  the  case,  found  it 
legally  sufficient  and  concurred  with  the  commander’s 
recommendation. 
 
On  2  Nov  08,  the  staff  judge  advocate  (SJA),  for  the  State  of 
Ohio  Air,  Adjutant  General’s  Department  also  found  the  case 
legally sufficient, noting it is every airman’s responsibility to 
maintain  his  or  her  finances.    The  applicant  was  given  ample 
opportunity  to  provide  information  that  could  have  resulted  in 
her  retaining  her  security  clearance;  however,  she  failed  to 
respond in a timely manner.  The SJA recommend she be furnished a 
general discharge. 
 
On 6 Nov 08, the applicant was furnished a general discharge and 
credited  with  three  years,  one  month,  and  four  days  of  total 
Reserve service. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
NGB/A1POE  recommends  denial  noting  they  found  no  injustice  to 
warrant changing the applicant’s RE code.  The RE code 6H only 
applies  to  the  Air  National  Guard  and  is  used  when  a  service 
member  is  pending/approved  for  involuntary  separation/discharge 
in  accordance  with  AFI  36-3209,  Separation  and  Retirement 
Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members.  
Furthermore, this RE code is not a derogatory code and should not 
be barrier to the applicant’s enlistment. 
 
The NGB/A1POE 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  Mar  12,  for  review  and  comment  within  30  days 
(Exhibit E).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
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. 
 

 

2

3.  Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  an  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  the  evidence  presented  did  not 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  material  error  or  injustice;  the 
application  was  denied  without  a  personal  appearance;  and  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-2012-00396 in Executive Session on 6 Sep 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Feb 12, w/atchs. 
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Military Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C.  Letter, NGB/A1POE, dated 21 Feb 12. 
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Mar 12 

   Panel Chair 
   Member 
   Member 

  
Panel Chair 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

3



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01594

    Original file (BC-2010-01594.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-04827

    Original file (BC-2011-04827.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 01112

    Original file (BC 2013 01112.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01112 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 6H, which denotes (Air National Guard (ANG) pending discharge in accordance with ANGR 39-10 – involuntary) be changed to an eligible code. ...

  • 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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 03196

    Original file (BC 2013 03196.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    If the promotion recommendation had been received in a timely manner her name would have been submitted to the Aug 12, Position Vacancy List approved by Secretary of Defense on 5 Nov 12. The applicant was originally boarded for promotion on 14 Jul 12; however, her promotion was not submitted to NGB/A1PO in a timely manner due to an administrative error. If NGB/A1PO had received the original promotion request, they would have promoted the applicant with a DOR of 14 Jul 12 and a Promotion...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2009-03038

    Original file (BC-2009-03038.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of her original MSD extension request and correspondence related to the matter under review. On 15 Dec 08, NGB/A1POE recommended approval; however, the ANG Chief of Chaplains (NGB/HC) subsequently recommended denial, indicating the applicant’s retention was not in the best interests of the Air Force. However, inasmuch as the Board lacks the authority to reinstate applicants into the ANG, we believe the proper and fitting relief in...

  • 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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 05251

    Original file (BC 2013 05251.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05251 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Change her date of separation from the Regular Air Force from 11 May 13 to 19 Jun 13 to eliminate her break-in-service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is included at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05647

    Original file (BC 2013 05647.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05647 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Promotion Effective Date (PED) and Date of Rank (DOR) be backdated to the April 2013 Promotion Board results. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Due to an administrative error during a period...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03599

    Original file (BC 2013 03599.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 10 Oct 12, the applicant was originally considered for promotion to the grade of major; however, due to an administrative error, his selection for promotion was not processed through NGB in a timely manner. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show a Date of Rank (DOR) in the grade of major (0-4) of 10 Oct 12 rather than 12 Jan 13...