RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS. IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-01518 XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Separation Program Designator (SPD) code be changed so he can reenlist. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: After serving with the Air National Guard (ANG) for almost 18 years, he decided to start his own business. In order to focus more on his business, he separated from the ANG with what he believed was a hardship discharge. However, when he attempted to reenlist to complete sufficient years for retirement, he was told that he was marked as being absent without leave due to the Unit Training Assemblies (UTA) he missed. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 15 January 1987, the applicant entered the ANG. According to Special Order AQ-102 dated 6 December 2004, the applicant was relieved from the ANG and as a Reserve of the Air Force effective 6 December 2004, with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. His SPD code is HHJ (Unsatisfactory Performance.) The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PP recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. According to Special Order AQ-102, the applicant was relieved from the ANG with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge for “Unsatisfactory Participation” under the provisions of AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members. AFI 36-3209, states that a member should be discharged for unsatisfactory participation when the commander concerned has determined that the individual has no potential for useful service under conditions of full mobilization. A member may also be discharged when the member has accumulated nine or more unexcused absences from UTA within a 12-month period. ANGI 36-2002, Enlistment and Reenlistment in the Air National Guard and as a Reserve of the Air Force, states, “no waiver or exception to policy will be permitted for members discharged for unsatisfactory participation.” The applicant has not provided any documentation that the UTAs he missed were excused due to hardship. A complete copy of the NGB/A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 27 October 2015, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD: Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. After a careful review of the applicant's contentions, documentation submitted in support of the request, and the available evidence of record, we are not convinced the applicant has provided sufficient evidence for us to conclude that he is the victim of an error or injustice. We also note the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 Correction of military records: claims incident thereto, and AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records. While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years prior to receipt of the application, we believe a reasonable date of discovery was more than three years prior to receipt of the application. Therefore, because we do not find it would be in the interest of justice to recommend granting relief, and the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file the application. Accordingly, we find the application untimely. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-01518 in Executive Session on 21 January 2016, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 April 2015, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, NGB/A1PP, dated 27 August 2015. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 October 2015.