RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03836 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment (RE) Code of 2X (First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)) be changed to 12 [sic] (Recommend for reenlistment). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The accusations against him were not adequate to discharge him, so his chain of command unjustly denied him reenlistment after over 15 years of service. In Jun 11, his commander approved his reenlistment even though he had received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) and non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). However, his chain of command fabricated two additional LORs in order to involuntarily dismiss him from the military, and then denied his reenlistment in Mar 12. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 15 Jan 97, and was progressively promoted to the grade of Staff Sergeant (E-5). On 5 Feb 05, the applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for forms documentation errors, after being verbally counseled numerous times. On 20 Jan 09, the applicant received an Article 15 for violation of UCMJ Article 107: with intent to deceive, signing an official record by falsifying an inspection record to reflect that work had been completed and inspected, and by adding someone else’s initials, signature, and employee number. On 10 Jul 09, the applicant received a referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for the period 2 Jun 08 through 1 Jun 09 due to receipt of the Article 15. On 3 Aug 09, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failing to follow established tool turn-in procedures. On 30 Nov 11, the applicant received an LOR for entering into an aircraft without first checking the forms and making the aircraft safe for maintenance. On 7 Dec 11, the applicant received an LOR for failing to clear his area of FOD after being told to do so, lack of equipment accountability, poor storage of equipment, no serviceable documentation, and failure to provide proper leadership. On 19 Jan 12, the applicant received an LOR for committing maintenance malpractice by failure to comply with numerous basic maintenance practices, and disobeying direct verbal instructions. On 12 Mar 12, the applicant received a referral EPR for the period 2 Jun 11 through 2 Mar 12 for dereliction of duty and his failure to obey a direct order. On 28 Mar 12, the applicant’s commander denied the applicant reenlistment under the SRP. The applicant appealed the decision. The action was subsequently determined to be legally sufficient and the Staff Judge Advocate recommended denial of the applicant’s appeal. On 25 May 12, the appeal authority denied the applicant’s appeal. On 19 Jun 12, the applicant was released from active duty with an Honorable character of service, was issued an RE Code of 2X, and credited with 15 years, 5 months, and 5 days of total active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility which is included at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the USAF, states commanders have selective reenlistment selection or non- selection authority. The SRP considers the members EPR ratings, unfavorable information from any substantiated source, the airman’s willingness to comply with Air Force standards and/or the airman’s ability (or lack of) to meet required training and duty performance levels. The applicant contents his two LORs were fabricated to facilitate his involuntary discharge. However, he had a history of minor disciplinary work related infractions to include an Article 15 on 7 Jan 09 for intentionally falsifying a “Red X” discrepancy by using another member’s signature block and initialing it indicating the work had been completed and inspected. Additionally, the applicant had three LORs in Aug 09, Dec 11, and Jan 12 for poor maintenance practices. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 6 Nov 12 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 Air Force 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-2012-03836 in Executive Session on 2 Apr 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Aug 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 25 Oct 12. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Nov 12. Panel Chair