RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01118 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 3E (second-term or career airman who refused to get retainability for training or retraining or declined to attend PME) be removed from his record. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In March 2007, he was identified on the mandatory retraining list. He was given two weeks to make this very important career decision. Due to the limited amount of time he was given he decided to deny the retraining at that time. Several months later he was classified as 3E which made him ineligible to reenlist and test for promotion. He is a member of the vice presidential security team at Andrews Air Force Base and holds a yankee white and top secret clearance. Currently there is a shortage of yankee white and top secret clearances at Andrews Air Force Base along with a shortage of security forces personnel Air Force wide. He believes it is in the best interest of the Air Force to reverse his classification and afford him the opportunity to continue his career. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of staff sergeant having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 April 2005. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the Air Staff determined a greater need for the members in the applicant's AFSC to fill more critical, undermanned skills. It would not be fair to those individuals who had to retrain to continue their career, to let members who declined to retrain (ending their career) continue their career after the retraining program ended. The Noncommissioned Officer Retraining Program (NCORP) is a multipurpose, two-phase program designed to rebalance the enlisted force by moving NCOs from career fields with overages to those skills experiencing shortages; and to provide NCOs with a voice in their career development. Phase I (voluntary) of the FY07 NCORP ran 26 July 2006 through 18 September 2006, and required approximately 1,113 NCOs/SNCO to retrain out over overmanned skills into shortage skills. Phase II (involuntary) ran 3 January 2007 through 31 March 2007, with 28 February 2007 being the suspense date for all vulnerable NCOs/SNCOs to submit their completed application. Air Staff targeted 180 NCOs in the applicant's AFSC/grade (3POX1 - Security Forces) to retrain into the 3POX1 "A-Military Working Dog Handler" and "B-Combat Arms" sub-career fields. Since voluntary targets were not met in the applicant's AFSC during Phase I, Air Staff directed implementation of Phase II (involuntary) directing retraining into the A and B sub-career fields of Security Forces. The applicant stated in his request he declined to retrain. Although most of the FY07 retraining records were inadvertently destroyed (including applicant's information), all applicant's and their commander's were required to acknowledge the FY07 NCORP Phase II memorandum. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 22 May 2009, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this date, this office has received no response. _________________________________________________________________ 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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record, it is our opinion that given the circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air Force, the RE code assigned was proper and in compliance with the appropriate instructions. The applicant has not provided any evidence which would lead us to believe otherwise. Therefore, we agree with 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. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought. 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 an 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-2009-01118 in Executive Session on 21 July 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number 2009-01118 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 March 2009. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 29 January 2009. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 May 2009. Panel Chair 3