RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02026 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