RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01102

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility be changed from “Ineligible” to 
“Eligible.”

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Although he was involved in misconduct with the military police 
on base; he was not court-martialed for the one-time incident.  
He was released from his full-time Active Guard Reserve (AGR) 
position and received a general (under honorable conditions) 
discharge.

He takes full responsibility for the incident of bad judgment.  
Since leaving the ANG, he served in the Army Reserves for three 
years and was honorably discharged in Oct 05.

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
discharge certificates, discharge order, NGB Form 22; Report of 
Separation and Record of Service; and DD Form 214, Certificate 
of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

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

________________________________________________________________


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 Jun 99, the applicant enlisted in the Georgia Air National 
Guard (GAANG).  

On 25 Nov 02, he was relieved from his assignment and discharged 
with service characterized as general, under honorable 
conditions.  

He received a reenlistment eligibility status of “Ineligible.”

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1PP recommends denial.  A1PP states that according to the 
NGB Form 22, the applicant was separated with a general, under 
honorable conditions discharge due to misconduct.  The 
Separation Program Designator (SPD) code “HKA” indicates an 
involuntary discharge that was directed in lieu of further 
proceedings by convening of a board, for a pattern of misconduct 
of discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  
Members receiving this type of discharge are “ineligible” for 
reenlistment as indicated in on his NGB Form 22.

The applicant’s misconduct prevents him from being able to 
reenlist in the ANG.

The complete A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 28 Jun 13, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded 
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  To 
date, a response has not been received (Exhibit C).

________________________________________________________________

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 opinion and recommendation 
of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its 
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 Docket Number    
BC-2013-01102 in Executive Session on 5 Dec 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Feb 13, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, NGB/A1PP, dated 11 Jun 13.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jun 13.




				Panel Chair