RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-04000

	COUNSEL: 

	HEARING: YES

APPLICANT’S REQUEST.  That the following items in his NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, effective date 6 Sep 13, be change:  

1)	Item 23: Authority and Reason for Separation changed to “Miscellaneous;” and,
 
2)	Item 26: Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code change to “Secretarial Authority.” 

APPLICANT’S CONTENTION.  Through counsel, he suffered a material injustice after engaging in a protected communication and was subjected to retaliatory personnel action in violation of Title 10 U.S.C. §1034 and Air Force Instruction (AFI) 90-301, Inspector General (IG) Complaint Resolution.  He was assigned to the Arizona Air National Guard (ANG) and accepted a job in North Carolina.  The APPLICANT’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS.  The APPLICANT is a former Air Force senior airman.  

On 19 Oct 12, the 162 Fighter Wing (FW) initiated a debt collection for two previous paid travel vouchers and denied payment of a third.  

On 4 Sep 13, according to the Reprisal Complaint Analysis (RCA), an IG reprisal allegation was filed based on a 27 Feb 13 protected communication.  

Effective 6 Sep 13, the APPLICANT was honorably discharged from the Arizona ANG with a 6U RE code.  

On 5 May 15, SAF/IGQ completed the RCA concurring with the AZ/IG recommendation that an investigation into the APPLICANT’s reprisal allegation was not warranted.  

For more information, see the excerpt of the APPLICANT’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION.  NGB/A1PP recommends denial of the APPLICANT’s request to change his RE code to “Secretarial Authority” and reason for separation to “Miscellaneous” as the ANG uses different RE codes than the regular Air Force.  Furthermore, NGB/A1PP does not find any wrongdoing in the denial of APPLICANT’s reenlistment based on policy.  However, they recommend the board grant the APPLICANT’s request to change the RE code.  The 6U RE code was erroneously entered by the Force Support Squadron instead of the more appropriate 6H RE code which is used for members not selected for retention upon their Expiration Term of Service.  The complete advisory, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION.  The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the APPLICANT on 9 Jan 18 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES:

1. The application was timely filed.  

2. The APPLICANT exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.  

3. After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the APPLICANT is not the victim of an error or injustice.  While the Board notes the NGB/A1PP comments indicating that an alternative relief should be granted, the Board believes the suggested relief may be perceived as more detrimental to the APPLICANT, as such, no action will be taken on NGB/A1PP’s recommendation to change his RE code to 6H.  

4.  The applicant also alleges he has been the victim of a reprisal.  As noted above, on 5 May 15, SAF/IGQ completed the RCA concurring with the AZ/IG recommendation that an investigation into the APPLICANT’s reprisal allegation was not warranted.  Nevertheless, based on the authority granted to this Board pursuant to Title 10 U.S.C. Section 1034, we reviewed the complete evidence of record to reach our own independent determination of whether reprisal occurred.  Based on our review, we conclude the applicant and counsel have failed to establish the applicant was the victim of reprisal for making a protected communication.  Therefore, in the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we do not find that the applicant has been the victim of reprisal pursuant to Title 10, U.S.C. Section 1034.

5. 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 issues involved.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS:  The APPLICANT be informed that the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION: The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-04000 in Executive Session on 28 Mar 18:

Panel Chair
Panel Member
Panel Member

All members voted not to correct the record as recommended.  The panel considered the following in AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-04000:

Exhibit A: APPLICANT’s application, DD Form 149, dated 5 Sep 16 & 9 Dec 16, w/atchs.
Exhibit B: Documentary evidence, including excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C: Advisory opinion, NGB/A1PP, dated 1 Jun 17, w/atchs.
Exhibit D: Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBR to APPLICANT, dated 9 Jan 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.