RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03670 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. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Somehow his paperwork was sent to the 173rd FW and with no knowledge that he was to be pulling drills every month he was not accounted for and discharged due to absence. In 13 years with the Oregon Air National Guard, he has never missed drills or had an unexcused absence. The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Recommendation for Discharge dated 8 August 2010 reflects the applicant failed to report for in-processing as well as his failure to report to any scheduled Unit Training Assemblies (UTAs), which constituted a discharge for Unsatisfactory Participation in accordance with AFI 36-3209. He was advised of his rights in this matter and elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf. The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed an honorable discharge. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PP recommends denial. A1PP states after reviewing the applicant’s NGB Form 22 and the discharge notification from 173rd MSX dated 6 August 2010, it was validated the member was discharged from the Oregon Air National Guard for unsatisfactory participation, specifically for failure to in-process and failure to report to any UTAs since being assigned to the 173rd MXS in September 2009. The involuntarily separation was conducted in accordance with AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, paragraph 3.13.2.1.1., which states, discharge for unsatisfactory participation when the commander concerned has determined that the individual has no potential for useful service under conditions of full mobilization. Members may be discharged when the member has accumulated nine or more unexcused absences from UTA within a 12-month period. The RE code of “6U” identifies a member that has not been selected for retention by the commander. The “6U” code is an Air Force sanctioned and recognized code and is found in the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS). This code only applies to the Air National Guard and is used when a member is not selected for further retention in accordance with ANGI 36-2002. This is not a derogatory code, so should the applicant wish to enlist in an Air Force Reserve unit it will not be a barrier to his enlistment. The A1PP complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 26 November 2012, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 timely filed. 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. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an 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-2012-03670 in Executive Session on 14 March 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Although chaired the panel, in view of her unavailability and the due date of the case, has agreed to sign as Acting Panel Chair. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-03670 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 July 2012. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Record. Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PP, dated 30 August 2012. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 November 2012.