RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02026
	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment, effective 20 May 12, be submitted and accepted 
for file or in the alternative, he be extended for 18 to 
24 months.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His command approved his reenlistment, he swore in, received a 
new DD Form 2, Identification (ID) Card, but the Xth Force 
Support Squadron (FSS) stopped the paperwork from being 
processed to investigate a clearance issue.  His commander 
signed extension paperwork for six months to give him an 
opportunity to resolve any concerns; however, it was turned in 
after his Expiration of Term of Service (ETS) and the FSS 
refused to process it.  He went to the base Inspector General 
(IG); however, he did not get results and escalated it to the 
IG’s office at the Xth AF/IG.  The IG investigated and found that 
his unit did intend for him to stay and directed him to the 
Board.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his 
enlistment contract; extension of enlistment and a letter from 
the Air Force Reserve Command IG (AFRC/IG).

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 10 Aug 04, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve 
for a period of six years.

According to a letter dated 12 Mar 09, from the Air Force 
Central Adjudication Facility to the applicant, he was advised 
that since he failed to submit a timely response, his 
eligibility for access to classified information or assignment 
to sensitive duties was denied.  

On 8 Aug 10, he reenlisted for a period of two years.

According the AF Form 1411, dated 5 Aug 2012, the applicant 
requested a 6 month extension for the purpose of ‘Reenlistment 
(Security Clearance).  On 5 Aug 12, his commander recommended 
approval.

On 7 Aug 12, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force 
Reserve in the grade of TSgt.

According to a letter dated 22 Feb 13, the AFRC/IGQI reviewed 
the applicant’s complaint regarding his enlistment extension and 
referred him to the AFBCMR.  

________________________________________________________________

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/A1K recommends denial, stating, in part, that after a 
careful review of all documents provided by the applicant, as 
well as information obtained from his previous unit, the 
applicant was denied a security clearance which rendered him 
ineligible for duty in his AFSC and subsequently ineligible for 
reenlistment.  The applicant was aware of this security 
clearance ineligibility because he was unable to access the 
Local Area Network (LAN) or deploy on annual tour from 2007 
until his separation date (7 Aug 12).  In Accordance With (IAW) 
the Air Force Enlisted Classification Directory, he was unable 
to fulfill the mandatory AFSC (4A271) requirement of maintaining 
an Air Force Network License according to AFI 33-115, Volume 2, 
Licensing Network Users and Certifying Network Professionals. 

Air Force Reserve enlisted members are reenlisted IAW AFI 36-
2612, United States Air Force Reserve (USAFR) Reenlistment and 
Retention Program.  IAW AFI 36-2612, para 3.1., reenlistment in 
the USAFR is not a right; it is a privilege.  It obligates the 
individual to serve in the active military service in the event 
of mobilization.  Members have the right to be considered for 
reenlistment or extension if they: are eligible for 
reenlistment, have qualities that are essential for continued 
service in the USAFR, can perform duty in a career field for 
which the Air Force has a specific need (or the Air Force 
approves their retraining requests to fill valid requirements) 
and have 18 but less than 20 satisfactory years for Reserve 
retirement.

Summarily, the applicant was unable to perform his duties, IAW 
AFI 36-2612, para 3.1., and in large part, due to this fact, he 
was ineligible to reenlist.  Thus, the basis of the Command's 
recommendation of disapproval is established.

The complete A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He has always been able to access the LAN. He is a 7-Level 
supervisor and he used the computers to update training 
information about subordinates.  He used the computers to 
complete his own required training.

He has been on Annual Tour (AT) every year of his enlistment and 
provides some of the orders proving he did attend AT.  He 
performed ATs at Nellis AFB, Travis AFB, Portland OR, Scottsdale 
AZ, and March ARB for ATs during his enlistment.

His command approved him to be the Biomedical Equipment Repair 
Section Supervisor.  There is another member with the same grade 
who has the same years of training and they were promoted around 
the same time.  If it was true that he was unable to perform his 
duties then his command would not have let him be in charge of 
training and leading the other troops.  This includes going on 
annual tour with them and accessing the computers to update 
their information.

The Xth AF/IG stated that his unit was motivated to keep him as a 
member and unfortunately turned in his extension paperwork a day 
after his ETS. There was no mention of his security clearance 
issue and so he was wasting time and energy trying to fix a 
different problem.  After he found out about the denial, he 
returned to IG’s office for help and was referred to the Board.

The applicant goes on to explain the circumstances surrounding 
his security clearance and that he was not aware of the denial 
of his clearance because the notification letter was mailed to 
the wrong address.  Had he received this notification then he 
would have been able to resolve this issue prior to his 
separation.  He believes he has applied due diligence to get 
this situation resolved and will continue to pursue this through 
other avenues.

In further support of his appeal, the applicant provides a 
personal statement; copies of his AT orders; response from his 
congressional inquiry; letter of denial for eligibility for 
access to Classified Information, and various other documents.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 
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 error or injustice.  The applicant 
requests his reenlistment, effective 20 May 12, be accepted for 
file or in the alternative, he be extended in the Air Force 
Reserves for 18 to 24 months.  After carefully reviewing this 
application we do not find sufficient evidence to warrant 
disturbing the record.  In this respect, we note that on 5 Aug 
12, the applicant and his commander signed a six month extension 
request to give the applicant an opportunity to resolve security 
clearance concerns; however, according to the applicant it was 
turned in after his Expiration of Term of Service (ETS) and the 
FSS refused to process it.  We note that the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility recommends denial stating that the 
applicant was denied a security clearance which rendered him 
ineligible for duty in his AFSC and subsequently ineligible for 
reenlistment and we agree with their assessment.  Although, the 
applicant argues that the denial notice was sent to the wrong 
address which impacted his ability to resolve his security 
clearance issues prior to his separation, he has not provided 
sufficient evidence to persuade us that he was not aware that 
his security clearance was denied in 2007.  Therefore, we 
conclude the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof 
that he has been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we do not find a basis to 
grant the relief sought in this applicant.

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 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-2013-02026 in Executive Session on 4 Mar 14 and 14 May 
14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-02026 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Apr 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 1 Jul 13.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 13.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 26 Nov 13, w/atchs. 




                                   Panel Chair



1

5

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974