RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01112 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. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She received an honorable discharge at separation and has done nothing wrong; she should not have been given an RE code that prevents her from reenlisting. She failed her Career Development Course (CDC) and was not able to be reclassified into another Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) because she was unable to obtain a security clearance. This RE code is preventing her from reenlisting into another branch of service. While she was working towards clearing the issues with her credit, she failed her CDCs. In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of her Special Order P-003433, dated 28 Jun 01 (Air Force Reserve separation order); AF Form 2096, Classification/On-the-Job Training Action and National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, issued in conjunction with her 1 Dec 10 separation from the ANG. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 15 Sep 06, the applicant enlisted in the New York ANG. On 1 Dec 10, the applicant was honorably discharged by reason of “substandard/unsatisfactory performance–job skill proficiency,” and was issued an RE code of 6H. She was credited with 4 years, 2 months, and 17 days of service for pay. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PS recommends denial, stating, in part, that NGB/A1PP, the Subject Matter Expert (SME), recommends the applicant's RE code remain unchanged. If the applicant wishes to enlist in another branch of service she can contact a recruiter and request a waiver to allow her to become eligible for enlistment. Having complied with the BCMR directive and the governing directive there is no evidence to support the applicant’s claim. The complete A1PS evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 22 Mar 13 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ 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. 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 National Guard Bureau 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-2013-01112 in Executive Session on 9 Jan 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Feb 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PP, dated 18 Mar 13, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Mar 13. Panel Chair